RobInc AMDS (Finance) PhD Candidate

Happyrrhic Father's Day

2010-06-11T04:37:00.000-04:00

As part of my regularly-scheduled Thursday talk with Kait0r, she asked me when I was next going to come visit her. "Father's Day weekend," I replied. She got excited and told me she had something to show me:

"I have a scrapbook! But it's not for you!"
"Oh, whom is it for, then?" I asked, anxiously.
"Byron!"
"What's in it?" I asked, nervously.

Before she was so hyper and vocal about her thoughts with others, I feared that since she never grew up with me around--only with Byron--that she wouldn't understand the actual concept of who a father is; further, I worried that it would impact the role she saw of a father later in her life. A couple years ago, I felt a bit of relief when I noticed that she only referred to Byron, my ex-wife's new partner, by his name, but did address me as "dad."

"Lots of pictures of me and Byron!"

The strength to keep my integrity, and the time my daughter and I deserve together

2010-06-08T01:22:00.006-04:00

I was walking through Eglinton Square mall today; it's a small mall, close to where I live, that I walk through occasionally. I say "hi" to Jack, the computer kiosk vendor. I pick up my library reserves and drop off last week's audiobooks I listened to whilst walking. This time, Alan Greenspan's (2007) "The Age of Turbulence." I walked into the Coles Bookstore (yes, they still exist!). I had on my mind to find my daughter a Spongebob Squarepants item of paraphernalia--of any sort--just because. Just because we watched it together, over the phone, last Thursday.

I found this bookmark, with the inscription "Shh! I'm trying to read!" I recognized it immediately as the exact same bookmark my mother had bought for me when I was kait0r's age, about 25 years ago. Except the one my mother got me had a red tassle; this one had a black one, with some beads. I immediately snapped it up and explained to the cashier that I had owned the exact same bookmark some 25 years before, and that although I had been looking for something Spongebob since the Hallmark Store, I just had to get her this, lest I feel pressured into getting yet another piece of Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus memorabilia.

As I walked around the mall with my purchase, I realized that this wasn't fair. The visitation and telephone call arrangement that her mother has been fasitidious about (and even within that agreement, she has, on several occasions, forgotten to answer the phone during a scheduled call, or showed up late to pick up my daughter, without calling ahead--and since I'm now driving about two hours each way to visit her, in a foreign town without her cellular phone number, it's quite an inconvenience to try to find my ex and my young daughter when we meet at large venues, such as malls; sometimes I have to have them paged a few times before they remember to come meet).

The night before a scheduled flight in November, 2009, I had to Seattle, to attend a Walden University PhD residency, I was talking with my daughter on the phone. She intimated to me that she did wish we talked more, but that whenever she brought it up, she got "wiggles" in her tummy because it made her mother mad to bring it up. Nevermind that the current vistitation and access agreements were made years ago, before I moved to Toronto specifically to be closer to my daughter, and increase the frequency that I would get to spend days with her. Of course, at the time the court order was agreed upon, I lived about nine hours each direction to visit her; the court system the way it is, if I requested more visitation--and due to Canadian winters--for example in Winter 2007-2008, the GTA received over 50cm of snow one day--and then 50+cm again the next day! But if I had requested more access and was unable to make it to all of them, in the court's eyes, I had asked for too much and I could lose some of those visitation rights. I specifically moved to Toronto to be close enough to visit much more frequently--certainly once a week wouldn't have been an absurd ask. Yet my ex wife insists on fastidiously sticking to the one-a-month arrangement we arranged during our divorce years earlier. In fact, I was the one that had to initiate that because she had begun to play those games where none of the times I suggested, for months at a time, were acceptable times to pick up my daughter, or even spend time with her at home.

I have the strength and respect that I will not undermine my ex wife's authority when kait0r is with me; for example, she was not allowed to see Alice (2010), and she is not allowed to have pop at home. When we go out, the same rules apply. She cannot come to me to circumvent a normal rule. But I know that I do not have the psychological strength to keep that kind of integrity when she becomes a rebellious teen and comes to me when she can't get what she wants from her mother.

When Kaitlain was just born, I used to spend more time, in fact, with her than her mother. Whilst her mother would nap or watch television in the months after Kait0r was born, I would often take her with me to run errands or buy groceries. It was literally like having a part of me ripped away that night that her mother took her away without so much as a note indicating where she was going. My lawyer at the time advised that removing our child without an agreement constituted kidnapping, and I had to go through a length emergency court motion that my ex-wife never forgave me for; I had repeatedly emphasized that I did not want to appear hostile, but that my lawyer advised me that if I did not respond legally to that kidnapping, I would appear to have acquiesced and given up all my rights.

I want only the strength to do what is right, and to spend the time with my daughter that I feel we both deserve.

Are our affinities for our acquired tastes stronger than our tastes for things we like right away?

2005-05-26T15:30:00.000-04:00

Why are there no new episodes of the Daily Show Lately?

I puked the first time I tried blue cheese. Now, it's probably my favourite food in the world. I have weaker (shallower?) attachments to things I took likings to immediately than to things I've acquired affinities for over time. Maybe relationships share some of these qualities, too. Maybe some of the strongest relationships need time to see past the shallower aspects too.

How the Handicapper became a Jockey

2005-04-07T14:43:00.000-04:00

The other night, I had a rather intense dream. Intense emotions. Intense realism.

Intense fiction.

When one of my roommates first moved in to my current house and home last spring, he introduced me to the discipline of handicapping thoroughbred horse-races using the structured and tried and true methodology of the Controlling Factors: Speed, Class, Record, Weight, Interval between races, time, and odds. While he has returned to work two days per week, he spends every of the intervening days, for most of each day, betting the horses. Personally, I think it is a bit excessive, but it's not my business, as long as he makes rent each month.

Since then, I've expanded my handicapping knowledge base, including formal studies of various methodologies--but still, I don't have the money to play the races regularly--nor the desire to--but rather continued more formal studies because of my extensive background in forecasting, modeling, and statistical analyses.

But this is just background information for this odd, intense dream I had the other day.

The beginning of the dream started with my estranged wife spending pleasurable quality time together with me, just like we used to do. It was a refreshing change from the cold rudeness she affords me whenever I travel to her parents' house, where she lives with my daughter.

They say time heals all. But surely this is a sign that the intervening year and a half since our separation has had barely any effect at all--that I still wish that a snap of the finger could bring us back to our happy days--that we could once again be a happy family. In my dream we spent happy times, as we did for so much of the almost five years we were together, exploring the natural world together--thinking about the science behind what we take for granted--thinking about such things as why ice floats, for example. We take for granted that ice floats. But because we take it for granted, we don't think about it. And because we don't think about it, we really don't understand what is going on that makes ice float. In fact, ice won't always float. We take it for granted that ice floats in liquid water, but never stop to think that the very physics that makes ice float in water could make ice sink in some other liquids, or that in the microgravity of freefall, such as a spaceship in orbit--that's right, there is a strong gravitational pull on spaceships; the only reason astronauts seem to be weightless (not massless, which would mean they didn't exist) is because, they--and their spacecraft--are in fact very strongly being affected by the earth's gravity. They are weightless because they are in a very controlled freefall in a special condition where they fall towards the earth (quite fast, too--the speed at which they orbit) and they fall at just the right angle that their freefall is just at a rate that matches the curvature of the earth. That's right--spaceships and astronauts are actually in freefall, because of the earth's gravity (and their very fast orbital speed is evidence of how strong this gravity is), but in a special freefall where they fall towards the earth, and just match the curvature of the earth, so the freefall can continue ad nauseam. If the spaceship moved faster than the pull of gravity made them fall, the spaceship would leave orbit--and not be weightless. If the spaceship moved slower than the pull of gravity, it would not keep up with the curvature of the earth and would fall towards the earth until it crashed--and experience negative gee's. The whole reason I expounded on the explanation of spaceships and the illusion that there is no gravity in space is to explain further that ice does not float in space, but not because there is no gravity--rather because the spaceship is in freefall matching the pull of gravity, thus making it seem like there is no gravity, when in fact, there is a lot of gravity in space. Because it the pull of gravity is matched by the spaceship's freefall, ice in water would not float--the pull of gravity on the water and the ice is matched and made to seem absent because the ship that the glass of icewater is in is in freefall.

So why does ice float on earth, when we obviously know that gravity is present?

It is because water behaves strangely around its freezing point. Due to hydrogen bonding and the fact that a water molecule is polar (that is, because of an unpaired set of electrons on the oxygen-rich side of the molecule, and the relative lack of any charge on the hydrogen side, the water molecule is overall neutral electrically, but exerts a slight negative charge effect on the oxygen side and a slight positive charge effect on the hydrogen side). Because water is polar, it experiences hydrogen bonding--that is, an attraction between the unbalanced concentration of negative charge on the oxygen side and the unbalanced lack of negative charge (relative positivity) on the hydrogen side. This attraction occurs between water molecules and is, in fact, what causes water to be liquid at room temperature and pressure instead of a gas; without the cohesion caused by this polarity keeping molecules attracted to each other, at room temperature, water would not have any attraction between molecules, and a substance as light as water would cease to have any cohesive forces within it, freeing the molecules to act as a gas.

So, what does this have to do with ice floating? (Or, more circumlocutionally, what does this have to do with my intense dream?) It is this polarity that causes something strange to happen to the intermolecular interactions of water around its freezing point (perhaps another day, I'll explain that the Celsius temperature scale does not mean that the freezing point of water is "cold" or "hot"--or that 0°C lacks any temperature and, say, -40°C (which coincides with -40°F, incidentally). The Celsius scale was simply defined as 0°C being the temperature at which water turned from liquid to sold (or vice versa) at standard pressure, and 100°C was the point at which water turned from liquid to gas (or vice versa). But as I said, I'll write more at length on this in a future post....

As I just mentioned, the polarity causes something "strange" to happen around freezing temperature. First, I must make something else we take for granted--and therefore don't really understand--perfectly clear; I must define what, precisely, a "liquid" and a "solid" are. A liquid, as I alluded earlier, is a state of matter characterised by intermolecular attraction strong enough to cause the molecules of a substance to maintain contact with each other (without molecules having a strong enough attraction to maintain contact with each other, the substance ceases to "stay together" and becomes a gas). But this intermolecular attraction is not strong enough to form a structure (i.e. the intermolecular forces are not strong enough to maintain each molecule of the substance a fixed position relative to each other--a solid). What is the force opposing intermolecular forces, determining what state a substance will be? It is temperature, something else we take for granted. Temperature, technically defined by the Kinetic Molecular Theory, is simply defined as the amount of kinetic energy (energy of motion) the substance's molecules have. The faster the molecules move, the hotter a substance is. The slower a substance's molecules move, the colder the temperature. Therefore, although it is "temperature" that determines what state a substance will be--solid, liquid, or gas--a more meaningful explanation is that whether a substance will be a solid, liquid, or gas, is determined by the balance between the intermolecular attraction and the motion of the molecules (temperature) which acts opposing the intermolecular attraction. A solid is thus the point at which intermolecular attractive forces are stronger than the motion of the molecules. And since we do not change the intermolecular forces of a substance, the only variable is the temperature--or the motion of the molecules. A liquid is a substance within the range of temperature/molecular motion where intermolecular attraction is able to maintain a cohesion between the substance's molecules (i.e. intermolecular attraction is strong enough to prevent the substance from being a gas, but not strong enough to maintain fixed relative positions of the molecules--a solid), but not strong enough to make it a solid. When the molecular motion is high enough to overcome the intermolecular attraction, the substance ceases to maintain cohesion between molecules and the molecules have enough energy to roam freely--be a gas.

So what happens that is "strange" with water around it's freezing temperature? What is "strange" is that liquid water--water with enough intermolecular attraction to maintain cohesiveness of the substance to itself but enough molecular motion/temperature to prevent its molecules from settling into fixed relative positions/structure--has a certain average distance between its molecules. I don't know what it is numerically, but it naturally has a certain average distance between the molecules. Because of its polarity, when the temperature is low enough/molecular motion is slow enough/defined in the Celsius scale as 0°C, the water molecules are moving slowly enough that they do not have enough energy to move out of a fixed orientation/structure. But just before water "freezes" or "settles into a fixed position of molecules relative to each other," the polarity of the water molecules cause them to orient themselves in a hexagonal 3-dimensional structure. At temperatures/motions around freezing temperature, there is enough molecular motion energy to keep the hexagonal structure having an average distance between molecules that is farther apart than the average distance between liquid water molecules.

Why does this make solid water (ice) float in liquid water? It is because of this differential in distance between water molecules as a solid and as a liquid. (It should be noted that at slower molecular motions than around the freezing point, the molecules do not have enough molecular motion energy to keep the perfect hexagonal structure and the intermolecular forces win over the motion of temperature, causing the intermolecular attractive forces to draw water molecules closer together. This causes solid water to become more dense. At some theoretical point, the intermolecular attraction is strong enough to pull the water molecules closer together than liquid water's molecules, making ice sink.

But around the freezing point of water, when the hexagonal solid structure maintains a distance between molecules farther apart than liquid molecules, the concentration of mass is less in the solid structure than the concentration of mass of the liquid.

This is where I must point out that you should realize that it is not really ice that floats. It's really the more concentrated mass of the liquid water that is trying to fall as close to the earth as possible. Because it has more concentrated mass than the solid water (ice), it pushes the solid water out of the way. It could be sideways, upwards, diagonal--it doesn't care; the liquid water only cares about being as low as possible. So if it pushed the ice sideways, it would not gain any advantage in being lower. The only way to make as much liquid water sink as far down as possible is to push everything less dense than it upwards. This means, of course, that if you had a balloon filled with carbon dioxide and a balloon filled with helium as well as ice chunks in a swimming pool, the water would push the helium balloon and the ice upwards. But the carbon dioxide-filled balloon has more concentrated mass than liquid water (i.e. is more dense), so it pushes everything out of the way to get to the lowest position. This means pushing water, helium balloon, and ice out of the way to be lowest.

Now, I think you will never look at a glass of icewater the same way again.

And now, I can get back to my dream.

It was the enjoyment of exploring such simple physical properties for the sake of understanding that my wife and I shared. And in my dream, we blissfully discussed such properties.

After my dream took a sharp change in story, it went from the blissful to the exotic.

Enter my father, my sister, one of my friends, Brad, his dream-generated brother, my father, my father's girlfriend, and my other roommate, Alex. Somehow now there was an understanding that we would all participate in a thoroughbred race--not bet on it--we would be jockeys. What began to drive me crazy was that each person, in turn, caused a delay for some reason or other, to the point that Brad decided that he no longer had time to race his horse. Then his brother dropped out. Then my father's girlfriend, and then him. My sister stuck with me the longest (but strangely caused the first delay for taking a bath). Then I blew up at my father. Probably repressed emotions from waking hours, I lashed out at him for not understanding my situation. I lashed out at him for never even trying to understand my difficult emotional, financial, and life situation. He was lying down on a couch at the time, and completely out of character when he drew the blanket up to cover his crying face. Of course, in real life, I know his obstinance would result in the confrontation ending with his storming away, even more righteous than before, even less understanding than before.

At this point, the craziness of the idea that we would jockey horses yielded to the insanity of my intensely resentful, painful emotions. The fact that because the numbers worked out such that I and my friend would be jockeying two horses--just as insane as the idea that we would race a horse in the first place--was even overpowered by my anger of being delayed by everyone close to me, one by one; was even overpowered by my resentful feelings of being betrayed by everyone close to me when they decided not to race, after causing all the delay; was even overpowered by my disappointment that my parents had become increasingly less supportive and understanding as time has gone on--was even overpowered by my losing my wife and daughter a second time.

When I first set out to write this exposition, I thought it would help to verbalize all this pain.

But now, over an hour after I wrote the first words, the emotional pain has become so intense--the tears accurately prophesied in my dream now a reality--I realize that time has done nothing to heal anything.

Rather, time has caused my emotional wounds to fester and ripen--and rot.

If not time, what--if anything--will save me?

What would she think of me now?

2005-03-26T13:31:00.000-05:00

My daughter, born July 6, 2003, is less than two years old. Of course I can't expect her to recognize me every time I visit, since I can only afford to visit her once every two months or so. But what would that turn into in her adolescent years?

"Where were you when I was growing up?? Living it up without a care in the world?!?

Of course not. Going from MBA graduate and performance measurement consultant to living on social assistance is hardly living it up. And still being completely in love with my estranged wife doesn't quite portray the picture she'll develop growing up. Her mother with her new boyfriends. Her life not knowing her father.

But why do I keep trying to find a job in my field in Toronto? It's not because I'm in love with Toronto; it's to be close to you, my beloved daughter.

But how can a father explain that to a daughter--as much of a genius as she is--as less than two years old? I can't.

I'll have a small amount of money after the 30th. Maybe I'll plan a trip then. But will I have a birth certificate in hand?

Sometimes I'm too much of a nice guy.

My daughter is a genius!

2005-03-21T18:21:00.000-05:00

Last week I was in Toronto for that Interview I mentioned in a previous blog. The interview was on a Monday, and my sister was gracious enough to let me stay at her place as long as I needed to. So, I made plans for Tuesday and Tuesday morning left early to visit my daughter, a couple hours away. She lives with her mother and maternal grandparents in the countryside between Hamilton and St. Catharines.

I got there and rang the doorbell.
No Answer.

I had already made arrangements, so I knew someone was home. I rang the doorbell again.
No Answer. Ashley must be on the phone...as she usually is when I visit...

I banged on the door a bit to try get someone's attention and I heard some noises within. I heard the door unlatch and saw the slightly bedraggled face of my once-beloved wife, seemingly perturbed for interrupting her phone call. As I made my way in and down to the family room, she returned to her all-important phone call. Must be the boyfriend.

I had a gift for Kaitlain, but she seemed not to recognize me. Not as her father. Not as a friend. Not as anyone in particular.

This really hurts. My own daughter.... who showed more recognition in the first three months of her life when we lived together... can't even recognize me as someone she should know.

*sigh*

A few minutes later, as she always does, she warmed up to me, and became my friend.
She ran and fetched something from the corner, out of sight.

Oh, a book? For us to read?

She quickly pointed out a few objects in the book and ran back to put the book back, returning shortly with another book.

Oh, another book! What can you point out in this one? Oh! The Moon! That's right!

I took out the camera I had borrowed from my sister to take some pictures and fumbled around with it to figure out how to turn it on. Eventually, I figured it out and snapped a couple pictures. Ashley was nice enough to take some time out of her busy television-watching schedule to demand her passport and birth certificate. I replied that I didn't know where they were.

The nerve! She asked for the snowboard I gave her back, and I gave it to her. She asked for this and that back. And I've always brought them for her. Here I am, unemployed, waiting for my first disability cheque (going on over three months since I was approved and not a penny in sight), I ask for the ring back to help me survive, and she refuses to let me pawn it for survival money. And now makes more demands on me?

In my brief lapse of attention, Kaitlain had taken the camera from me and was turning it on and off! She had figured out in less time than it had taken me, how to turn on and off the camera! And from the few times I snapped her picture, she already knew how to jam it in my face, right way forward and up, and all!

I took it back and shoved it quickly without thought into its leather case. Without having to be shown, she took the camera, removed it from its case, and turned it on. No sooner had I realized this than it was shoved in my face again, ready to snap a closeup of my nose! And then she put it back in the case.

Now I don't know any standards for development at different ages, but I'm pretty sure she figured out the proper orientation and the fact that the camera fits into its leather case at all in record time.

My daughter is a genius.

// IMPORTANT // Telephone Scam to hijack your phone line! -- Please Read!

2005-03-18T09:19:00.000-05:00

I was recently informed of this scam by a friend, but after receiving it for the second time from another friend and reading more about it, I decided to post a copy of the Blog found at http://www.benedictionblogson.com/archives/001197.php A large number of replies have been posted there as well with others' experiences, so you might want to check out that link after reading about it...

The information is from the RCMP

Telephone scam: "$99 vacation"

La version française suit la version anglaise.

The Telephony Unit has been advised that many employees have received along-distance call (from 1-305-675-6263 or 567-3100) advising that theyhave won a 5-day vacation for only $99.

The recorded message asks the winner to dial "9" to speak to an operator.

This is a scam. If you receive such a call, please hang up and do not press 9. If you do, others will be able to make long-distance callsfrom your telephone line and charges will be forwarded to your bill.

We thank you for your cooperation.

Arnaque téléphonique : voyage pour 99 $
Le Groupe de la téléphonie a appris que plusieurs personnes ont reçudes appels interurbains (des numéro 305 675-6263 et 567-3100) lesinformant qu'ils viennent de gagner un voyage de cinq (5) jours pourseulement 99 $.

Le message enregistré demande au gagnant d'appuyer sur le « 9 pour parler à un téléphoniste. Veuillez noter qu'il s'agit d'une arnaque. Si vous recevez un tel appel, raccrochez immédiatement sans appuyer sur le 9.

Autrement ces gens pourront faire des appels interurbains à partir de votre lignetéléphonique et les frais seront facturés à votre numéro.

Nous vous remercions de votre collaboration.

These numbers are working their way through trunk systems. People receiving the calls in Canada and the US are asked to contact PhoneBusters. See the updated info.
Posted by Bene Diction at January 20, 2005 11:52 PM

Comments
Not only is it a scam, but the automatic dialing system they are using spent the better part of Friday calling every 911 trunk we had in our system. Because the calls came from out of country, Bell couldn't shut them down.Telemarketers!!!!!!Steam from my ears Bene....
Posted by: hamster on January 24, 2005 10:28 AM

How to be SMART at your next job interview!

2005-03-14T19:17:00.000-05:00

Speaking of interviews... I just had my third interview with the Senior Director of Marketing Analytics and Customer Segmentation at CIBC. I have high hopes for this position; it's a level 8 position. This could really help me with my financial situation...Many ways to approach interviews.

As fledgling MBAs, we were thoroughly trained in several techniques, such as the "STAR" technique, etc. If I can help one person by writing this, perhaps they can pay me some of their earnings The STAR technique has many advantages for both candidate and interviewer(s). As a candidate, you appear professional, analytical, and--above all--organized. As an interviewer in a structured interview, it is very easy to identify the competencies being communicated by the candidate, assess how genuine the candidate is, and have concrete material to back up the competencies identified for the job description.

It involves a lot of preparation (which also looks good to prospective employers), thought, and a little bit of role-playing the part of a human resource manager. One thing to remember when you get an interview is that time is money; and usually an employer won't spend the time interviewing you unless they have an intention to hire you if you fit the bill. The method I'm proposing will help you fit the bill, to a "T," and present it in a way that can't be missed.STAR is very simple. It stands for (S)ituation, (T)asks, (A)ction taken, (R)esults.It helps if, before the interview, out of courtesy, you ask if you may take notes. This has the added benefit of making you look very organized, interested, attentive, and analytical.

Trained human resource professionals--experienced interviewers--know that flying by the seat of their pants and going by gut feeling has a very low validity; during my advanced studies in Recruitment and Selection as part of my MBA program, we studied the statistical validities of the various interview methods. By far the most reliable is the structured interview, with either behaviour-descriptive (use examples from your past to demonstrate specific competencies--the STAR method fits this method like a glove) or situational (what would you do if...?) In all structured interviews, desired competencies for the position (e.g. analytical skills, quantitative skills, relationship-building, time management, adaptability, etc.) are identified first during a thorough job analysis.

Questions are derived to assess whether or not each candidate has each competency identified. Scoring is pre-determined and standardized for sample answers to the question (again, you will see why the STAR method really shines in structured interviews). The same set of questions and answer scoring paradigm is applied to every candidate--no ad hoc questions, no scoring by "gut feeling." This is the interviewing technique that large corporations are adopting to be defensible in their selections, to be accurate in their selections, and in some cases--to abide by law; all chartered banks, transportation businesses, and some others are covered by federal jurisdiction employment laws requiring rigorous recruitment and selection procedures be followed.

But I'm getting off-topic a little.When you are asked a question, if it is a good, structured interview, the purpose of the question will be to identify whether or not you have a specific competency. Your job, the night before, was to do a job analysis, yourself, on the position and try to identify as many competencies as you think are important to the position. Your job, the night before, was also to think of an example or two from your previous jobs, volunteer positions, or anywhere in life, where something you did shows that you have that specific competency (such as leadership--the time you had a school project and there was chaos people doing a lot of work, other people doing none, so you showed strong leadership, divided the project into work packages, delegated the work packages, tracked their progress, etc.), and then come up with answers in the "STAR" format.

In fact, I'll use this exemplar to illustrate how to prepare your answers using the STAR format in your preparation for the interview the night before:

Suppose you are going to interview for a position as a camp counsellor.

List out competencies you think a camp counseller requires: creativity, people-skills, leadership, initiative, time-management, dealing with crises--I'm sure you can come up with more given a few minutes.Let's take "leadership" as an example to prepare your answer the night before.

A question that might be asked tomorrow during the interview would be, "Can you give an example of a time you showed leadership skills?" This question obviously is designed to assess whether you have demonstrable competencies in leadership, initiative, management, people-skills.

Situation: What was the situation?- "One time, during a chemistry group project and presentation, we were placed into assigned groups. Naturally, the group dynamic began to show signs of chaos--some people seemed eager while others just joked around; some people came to group meetings with a lot of work, while others forgot they even had a meeting until the teacher told us to get into groups."

Task at hand: What did you have to do?- "In the interests of doing well on the project, I decided (showing initiative) that I had to bring cohesiveness, organization, and responsibility to the group."

Action taken: What did you do?- "I brought cohesiveness to the group by reminding everyone that this project was worth 50% of our grade in the course and that we had to have a more organized effort so that we could do a really good project. The other group members agreed."- "I divided the work to be done into logical work packages, and knowing the strengths and weaknesses of each one in the group--or finding them out if I didn't--I assigned these work packages to each group member... I found that even the members who didn't care about the project seemed to take an interest when I assigned them something to do that involved something they were good at!"- "I set up a chart that I put on a web page for everyone to see that outlined the important dates and so they could report on their progress. This seemed to spur some friendly competition in the group and I found after a while that even the group members who weren't so enthusiastic about the project were not just meeting their deadlines--they were beating them!"

Results: Quantify the results if possible.- "As a result, our group put on the best presentation of the class, earned a grade of 96%, and the teacher even asked if she could keep our project and presentation as an example for later years."

This should give you an example of about how much effort and thought you should put into preparing an example for each competency you identify.

During the interview, when the question is asked, you again remind your interviewer(s) of your organizational and analytical skills by asking for a moment to prepare your answer (taking your time to answer during an interview is something most people don't do--but should). Turn to a fresh page in your notebook, write out the headings: S, T, A, and R vertically and begin filling in your story.When you're good and ready--don't rush!--give your answer. You are sure to shine above the other candidates when you complete the whole interview with this level of organization. And what about unstructured interviews? If you can give this level of preparation, organization, and analysis, you'll wow your interviewer and blaze ahead of the competition.The most important thing is to give yourself ample time and effort the night before, doing a thorough job identifying competencies, examples from your past that show these competencies, and fitting them into the STAR model.

Even if a question takes you by surprise, don't worry; you can do a STAR analysis right on the spot--the important thing is not to look rushed or scared. Just ask for some time to prepare your answer, which they'll be more than happy to give (they want a good answer too, not one blurted out stream-of-consciousness style that goes nowhere and shows no competencies), try to identify the competency desired from their question, and open a fresh page...Of course, there are other interview techniques, but I think this one will help the most people get the most jobs.

Chronicling the Consternation of a Chronic Insomniac

2005-03-01T02:44:00.000-05:00

Would that it were not so.

During the course of a consequential conversation with an acquaintance in Tampa today, we coincidentally came to contemporaneous conclusions that the last ticket for the last Hullabaloo sold was the harbinger of the end of an era. And with that realization came our concurrent consternation. Consternation that everything that was once important would have no singular significance. Consternation that what had once defined our lives amounted to little more than puerile delusion. Consternation that our lives lacked lasting lucidness.

Possibly the prophpetic portent of a portentous progression in philosophical paradigm?

Would that it were not so.

The Crush

2005-02-28T03:51:00.000-05:00

I thought today's blog was appropriate given the irony of the situation. It is a repost of an original piece I wrote on July 21, 1999. It was originally posted on the Hullabaloo Raves Message Board which now resides at http://www.hulla.info While the three page discussion no longer exists on the current incarnation of the Hullabaloo message board, I have posted its three pages at the following links so you can follow the discussion and gain context for the discourse which ensued. Please assume that none of the links on the following pages are current or functional. At the time, I was a 23 year-old raver, stuck in a go-nowhere relationship. For reasons I may discuss at a later date, friends called christened me "pErMAsKeTcH." Partly because I was older than the average Hullabaloo raver, partly because of my highly introspective expositions, and partly because of how prolific these writings were, I was held in reasonably high esteem by almost all of the Hullabaloo community; I was, by all accounts, a celebrity philosopher in the eyes of many of its members:

Crushes, Love, and Relationships: Page 1
Crushes, Love, and Relationships: Page 2
Crushes, Love, and Relationships: Page 3

The irony is that I took the leap of faith I wrote about in the original post. And it led to the best years of my life. It led to years of living a charmed life that I thought was too good to be true. And perhaps it was. For when it ended, the situation wasn't the same; for when it ended, I was completely in love with my wife; for when it ended, we had brought into the world--and into a broken family--a beautiful daughter, Kaitlain Rita Lai Yee Cheung.

And thus begins my original post, dated July 21, 1999:

Here's something that I've come to recognize, at least in my situation, over the years (since I'm sooooo old).

People do tend to over-analyze, or at least spend a lot of time thinking or imagining when they're in a relationship--especially at the beginning stages of a relationship.

But that doesn't make it wrong.

I find that sometimes it's this thinking intensely to yourself, bathing yourself in the emotion which is so powerful then, and cherishing the thoughts and feelings, because as the relationship progresses (if it does), things will never be the same.

Special, emotional. But this special prelogue has its own special feeling, when your feelings are usually still to be revealed to the other person, or when you're thinking of a good time, or how to say it...

Then there's a crucial point in your developing relationship.

The point when you decide that you want to make your feelings known.

When you don't think that the other person would be scared away, and trying to muster the courage to tell them, trying to ignore the very real possibility of rejection....

This is often one of the times it seems that your feelings are most intense--and most private-- because you're never before more certain of how you feel.

You feel tingles in your arms and fingers and your heart races--as much from anxiety and nervousness as from excitement and exhilaration.

I'm sure a lot of people have said what they wanted to say to nobody before this point. And take a mental snapshot of how you're feeling.

Trust me.

Because once you get the courage and admit your most inner--most private--most passionate feelings to the other person, things change.

You've just admitted things to yourself.

Past the point of no return, not only have you admitted unrecoverably and embarrassingly your strong feelings for someone, but you've unknowingly admitted them to yourself, possibly for the first time.

You notice that while you still share feelings for this person, that they've changed a little in their quality, now that you've admitted it both to them and yourself.....

I've found that the most intense, special feelings you have are the times just leading up to that.... The feelings definitely change after that.

Not necessarily better. Not necessarily worse.

But you know what I mean.

Different.

Not so "special" anymore, because it's not your little secret crush anymore.

I'm telling you this because I'm experiencing this for the first time in over three years.

Those of you who know me, know that I'm quite a bit older than the average age of most of us Hullaboarders. And those of you who know me also know that I lived with my last girlfriend for over a year, in our own house.

But things, we both new, weren't quite right.

We always got along.

We never fought, ever

And we were always able to function as a couple.

Sure, we cared about each other. Sure, it was the most secure feeling in the world to know that you could just walk home, and waiting for you would be someone who cares for you--who could listen unconditionally to your concerns and your fears. Someone who could make it all better, just by being there.

But the relationship, as time progressed, evidently began missing the vital sparks that make it worth while. The butterflies in the stomach and heart flutters had long since subsided. This is what it is like to be married....

Oh, don't get me wrong. Marriage is a long-standing and respectable institution. But even at my age (at the time I wrote this, I was 23; I have since married; and I have since separated), I'm not ready. Perhaps at one time I thought I was. But I realized as time goes on, perhaps we care about each other, and perhaps we get along--two components of a marriage that many couples don't seem to have--and it was unfortuante. But could we truly say that we still loved each other?

In fact, it was difficult to admit, but over time, it became difficult even to say it to each other.

And we realized that we hardly shared any common interests or common ground. I'm not ready to give up partying, and she's not really into raving (she's even older than me). I'm not ready to commit, especially when her ambitions are so different to mine. I am on the verge of completing my honours degree in biotechnology (I have since completed it, and also completed my Masters degree), and want to pursue a career in research, and eventually business. I could not reconcile with a simple desire to become a receptionist or a secretary.

I found it increasingly difficult to relate, and by the time I reached my current academic position, it's even impossible to explain things that troubled me about my thesis, or indeed what my thesis was about. Not being able to party with her, not being able to share my academic career (my life) with her, nor any of my hobbies or ambitions made me question whether we were stuck in this relationship because ending a three-year cohabitating relationship is somewhat akin to the violent amputation of [insert name of any appropriate body part here].

Regardless of whether there were sparks or or whether there was true love or not, it still hurts, because it's so much intermingled with your life that you can't conceive of life without her--even if it wasn't the most exciting part of your life.

And then you stall at this point. Perhaps for days, perhaps weeks..months... Sometimes it takes a catalyst to help you make the final plunge. You know that no matter how many times you think it over. You know no matter how supportive your friends and relatives are and will be, that there will still be long, lonely nights ahead, crying yourself to sleep, if you can even. (I'd like to take the opportunity at this point to say that it is *really* easy to fall into a drug trap here.... DON'T! ps. same with rebound )

Perhaps there has been a relationship germinating all along, and you never realized it.

Perhaps there is a relationship waiting to be conceived. In either case, sometimes another special someone that you've known and tried to suppress feelings for for the longest time reveals their deep, dark secret--they have feelings for you, too.

And no matter how promising the prospect of this relationship is--no--it does not make the separation that you know is coming--is necessarily coming--any easier.

But you have new-found confidence and drive to make the right decision. You know that you've been stagnating in a relationship that wasn't meant to be. Just because nothing catalyzed its disintegration before this point does not mean it was meant to be. You tell yourself this over..and over.... and you wish if only you could believe it.... if only you could truly believe that ripping off your right arm was worth the risk of this new venture.

Who knows? Of course, there's no way of knowing... But you decide to take the chance. your number one fear of being alone--not having been truly alone for three years--shows its pain on your face.

But with your new-found confidence and empowerment given by the prospect of a promising new relationship, you turn away, stop watching your old past float away, and set out to experience feelings and perhaps even express your feelinngs in ways all but forgotten...for three years...

There are only two alternatives. Status quo, or brave new world. My one most important hope of my life is that I choose the path that leads me back to happiness I once knew, and not to an emotional rollercoaster of loneliness, despair, despondence.......

Swiffer Vows

2005-02-26T01:01:00.000-05:00

How could she look me in the eyes to say her wedding vows and less than a year later sweep them aside with less effort than a Swiffer?

--- Added July 6, 2006 10:45pm AUDIO FOR THIS SECTION COMING SOON ---
And what a disgrace this new Swiffer Sweeper that contains a disposable cardboard with a sticky surface that you discard after it has collected all the particulate matter that it can? Hasn't anyone ever heard of a carpet sweeper? They work better than this Swiffer product, come for free with some Bessel carpet steam cleaners (and are cheap otherwise), and actually with the brushes that rotate in opposite directions, are almost as efficient as a full upright or canister vacuum with rotating bristles. They pick up pet hair, small particulate matter, dust, and even larger objects. There are no parts to throw away--you simply empty the dust pan portion of the floor sweeper and use the included comb to remove the pet hair from the brushes and away you go!

Swiffer has got to be the biggest scam in marketing. I majored in Marketing Research and Strategic Marketing Analytics during my masters and although I am not using my MBA degree right now, I do know enough that products like the Mach3, Fusion, Shick Quattro, all Swiffer products, are based on a "planned obsolescence" business model; that is, Gilette could easily make a razor that lasts several years, but then who would buy the super-expensive Mach3 or Fusion blades, which is where the recurring revenues come from? So, the blades are engineered to last a lot shorter than they could. What these consumer product companies tout as better products, closer shaves, cleaner rooms, etc., are actually directives from product managers and marketing managers to instruct engineers to find ways for these products to last an "average" time that people are used to changing their shaver blades, an average amount of dust and particulate matter consumers want to be able to pick up before spending more money (I count using up a new disposable as spending in this case--no, I won't get into accounting and revenue or expediture recognition) and try to engineer their products to bring in a steady income stream based on recurring sales of razor blades, Swiffer dusters, sweepers, wipes, and whatever other products you notice using the same business model--planned obsolescence.

This is in stark contrast to what MSN Messenger (now Windows Live Messenger) and ICQ have done; they actually required users to change chat client software to support new features that were no longer backwardly compatible with the old MSN and ICQ networks; of course, a simple check could be done to see if an older version of MSN or ICQ (they were much faster, used less memory, and got the job done), but that would add a lot of overhead and double the coding required. This is not planned obsolescence strictly speaking (although the new veresions do display advertisements that I cannot figure out how to turn off completely--I can get them not to display, but the space used by the ads is still there. And it's not that I'm bothered by the ads--I know I have no money to buy whatever the ads are promoting, but it is a reality that as technology improves, sometimes new technologies are impractical or unfeasible to support the old. Again, this is not planned obsolescence.

By the way, I shave in the shower, using soap and extremely quick strokes. I get the same close shave as a new Mach3 or Fusion (I was given a Fusion 5-blade as a gift), from a blade I changed over a year ago as I do from a brand new Mach3 blade. Maybe Gilette will realize that some people who don't grow facial hair too quickly aren't buying replacement blades and engineer new Mach3 shaving blades to wear down even faster than they used to.

Interestingly enough, I'm just curious, but of you using Mach3, Fusion 5-blade, Schick Quattro 4-blade, Venus 3-blade, how often do you change your blades, and is it because your blade does not shave as close as it used to, it seems to cause tears that bleed in the skin, it feels less sharp when new blades are used, or what? I'm curious. I last changed my Mach3 blade last summer and it's still performing just as well as it was last summer, and I have no plans to change blades for maybe another year.

Could it also be the way I shave? I was never taught the proper way to shave; my father dry shaves, uses the cheapest single-blade disposable he can find (or his electric shaver--I actually have a Philipps electric too for emergencies, but I find it takes a long time and doesn't shave nearly as close as my manual razor). So, until I hear otherwise, I use soap on my face (deodorant soaps, such as Zest, Irish Spring, etc.) and I use an upstroke against the hair growth line (I know people say it causes ingrown hairs and such but I have never yet cut myself or had an ingrown hair in all the years I've been shaving since high school over a decade ago). My strokes generally last less than half a second each, using gentle pressure, and then I wash off the stubble and the soap I used to lubricate. I've been shaving this way since I can remember (since one of my ex-girlfriends told me guys do shave in the shower), so I don't spend any money on shaving gel or aftershave either. I cut myself shaving no more than once a year, and I complete shaving my entire facial hair in less than a minute.

Why don't more people do it this way? Is it that people just got into the habit having been taught a certain way? Is it that people think shaving slower gives better results? Is it that people think that shaving with the hair growth rather than against it is safer or yields better results? I mean I don't get a five o'clock shadow until I'm already in bed for the night.

Maybe I should re-record the voice narration for this blog, since it's turned into a lot longer post than I'd originally intended.

If you have a good razor, try using it for a year, using soap as a lubricant, light pressure, and very quick strokes (perhaps chin to sideburns takes 1/6 to 1/8 of a second), the moustache is even faster--whole moustache area I complete in about 1.5 seconds, again using up-strokes.

As long as your blade does not slice sideways through your skin, or you don't shave over a pimple or a large mole, you should have just as close a shave, no bleeding ever, and save valuable time--30 seconds is generally long enough to do a complete shave, including moustache, beard from chins to sideburns, the area below and behind the ear, and the stray hairs on the middle throat.

Try it and please let me know your results! I'm eager to find out other people's usual method of shaving (since I was never taught it), and your experiences with my method that evolved over time. Since I now have a Mach 3 with 3 extra blades, and a Fusion 5-blade with 3 extra blades, I do not anticipate having to buy replacement razor blades for either of my razors for several years.

Incidentally, I think I found the Mach 3 more comfortable to shave with. It might have been the specific Fusion 5-blade razor head that I got, but I don't think so. I think Gilette found the optimal number of blades at 3 and should probably stop before we get 8,192-blade razors. The Shick Quattro is not bad but I've never used it long enough to wear it out. I do like how the blades flex, though; however, since I'm not aware of any replacement razor heads for Schick Quattro, the price becomes an issue since you must throw away each razor and buy a new one (or a multi-pack). On the other hand, like I said, razors tend to last far longer than their planned obsolescence lifetime I'm sure.

In case you're wondering, yes, I did just take a shower, and yes, I did just shave.

ps. Because of how fast I shave (~30 seconds for both sides, beard, moustache, chin, behind the ear, stray hairs on the cheek, and stray hairs on the throat), I find the powered versions completely worthless and simply a waste of money. I would never buy a Gilette Fusion again. I'll stick to Mach 3, as long as they're still making replacement razors when I need to buy one again :)

If enough people are interested, maybe I can make a video clip of how I shave in 30 seconds, no cuts, no missed spots, and most importantly, if you use aftershave, you definitely won't burn. I can't believe I told my father about this years ago, and might even have given him a Mach 3, but I still think he dry shaves--no shaving cream, no aftershave, no soap, no water.

Last point--I'm terribly interested in learning how to shave with a straight-edge blade. You know, the ones that the barbers use that expose a single sharp blade. Every time I try, I get nothing shaved--and I tried against and with the direction of growth. Is there some trick that I'm missing?

Well, hope to hear from you soon! Please write back with your comments about planned obsolescence and shaving. This post was originally about an an arrangement I had made with my ex-wife, who refused to honour it later, after she knows it's a nine-hour drive (I no longer have a car, and since she lives in the countryside on the Niagara Escarpment, I have no public transportation to get there either, not to mention no money).

For those of you who read this far down, my daughter, Kaitlain Rita Lai Yee Cheung (Half Pure Chinese, Half Pure Irish Newfoundlander) turns three years old today. And even though her mother took her out of town so I can't see her on her birthday or even talk to her to wish her a happy birthday, ... Well, ok, I won't go on any longer; I got appointments to keep...

I hope you keep coming back; most of my ramblings aren't so stream of consciousness--most of them have depth, insightfulness, and should be intuitive and taken for granted if I've done it right (since you take it for granted, you don't think about it--thus you don't really know it)

"The Truth About Truisms" or "How to live your life--happily."

2005-02-24T16:18:00.000-05:00

A recent conversation with a close relative of mine made me try and remember something I had posted about life in the Hullabaloo message board back in 1999. It was about living life and the psychological barriers we put up.

As I had alluded in my previous blog, we often take the obvious things in life for granted. We take them for granted and never give them a second thought--or often even a first. I believe this is why the psychological barriers we put up are often more effective than concrete at preventing us from achieving what we would like to.

Here's an example; you can live life however you want to. Most of us read the sentence, nod our heads in agreement, and file it away as something obviously true that we already knew.

But there's much more to it than that.

We really can live our lives how we want to. We think, "I can't run outside naked ranting and raving!" Well, can you?

Another truism--of course you can. Will you? Probably not. Some psychological barrier prevents most of us from doing it. But if we really wanted to, why should we not?

Many of us spend our lives with many unnecessary incongruities between what we truly want and what we are willing to do. How can we claim to truly want to go for a brisk walk every day when we aren't willing to go outside in the winter? How can we claim to want to be a doctor or a lawyer or an engineer when we don't want to do the schooling that goes with it?

The simple answer? We can't.

When we decide that we want something, let's not stop thinking about it then and there. When we decide that we want something, let's evaluate what it means to want it--everything that goes with it--and then truly decide whether it is what we want or not. If we want to be true to ourselves, and if we want to live the lives we truly want to, we will either decide that we really don't want to go out for walks in the cold (and therefore don't really want to go for walks every day) or we don't really want to dissect cadavers or deal with coughs and colds all day, every day (and therefore don't really want to be doctors).

There really is only one answer to the question, "Do you want to live your life how you want?"
And if you decided that it was too cold to go for a walk today, you really did live your life how you wanted it--warm and lazy.

You didn't really want to get that exercise, did you?

-=-=-=-

But wait--it gets better!

We're not all at stages in our lives when we are deciding whether to be doctors or lawyers--or even whether we want to take up daily walks for exercise.

Sometimes we are where we are. And sometimes we're not happy about it. Some of us downright hate our jobs, or our present situations while bemoaning the "fact" that we can't change them.

Well, maybe we aren't willing to make drastic changes because of the ramifications. Let's take an exemplar from the popular television sitcom, Scrubs. One of the characters, the hospital janitor, insecure with his position, often acts out a self-deprecating hyperbole towards JD. He may hate picking up garbage others carelessly leave around. He may dread scrubbing grimy toilets. He may resent JD for being "better than him."

But realize it or not, he is living his life of choice. And if he doesn't want to do what it takes to make his life what it is, he will continue to be a janitor. So if the situation is not going to change, why hate it? Why go through life hating every moment when there are so precious few moments to live? He knows he has to pick up garbage. He can choose to be happy picking up garbage, or he can choose to spend the same time being unhappy. He can choose to celebrate life cleaning grimy toilets, or he can be miserable during that time. He can spend his life resenting others, or he can enjoy what he does have in life.

The truth about truisms is that we truly choose how we feel and what we want in life. It's a hierarchical relationship.

If you want to be a janitor, you must also want everything about being a janitor, from training, through routine duties, to exceptionally messy bed-pan spills. And while you reconcile within, you can choose to live your life happy. Or you can choose to live it miserably. There is no concrete barrier preventing you from being happy cleaning toilets. There are no chains holding you from smiling while sweeping the floors.

So the truth is, if you want to be happy in life. Be happy. When we want to be happy, but find that we're not--that's when we're not being true to ourselves. Realize there's nobody holding a gun to your head and forcing you not to be happy with your life.

And this is your life, dammit! You can be happy whenever--and wherever--you want.

During this Lenten season... (audio version)

2005-02-24T15:51:00.000-05:00

During this Lenten season...

2005-02-24T13:35:00.000-05:00

During Lent, the forty-day season preceding Easter, the theme of each day is soul-searching and submission--for reflection and repentence. It is a time for abstinence and prayer.

I was reminded that we are now in the Lenten season today when I heard on the radio news that Vatican officials have admitted Pope John Paul II to the hospital for a relapse of the flu.

For Pope John Paul II, that he may have a speedy and complete recovery to health, we pray.

Lord Hear Our Prayer

For all the sick and injured around the world, that they may have a speedy recovery to good health, we pray.

Lord Hear Our Prayer

For the sinners in us all, that we may find salvation through penance and abstinence in this time of Lent, we pray.

Lord Hear Our Prayer

Today is what many people would call a "cool and crisp, yet beautifully sunny winter day." I understand what it means. I agree that is how most people would report the day's condition, and I know that is what the day is; yet, I somehow don't feel it inside me. I don't believe it.

So what do I feel about this so-called beautiful day?

Nothing. Numbness. Emptiness. Bleak, even. Day 55 of the Julian calendar.

Lord, Hear My Prayer.

-=-=-=-=-

Last night, I reconnected with an old friend from the old Fidonet BBS days--from the International TEEN Echo. We were close once, and it was almost like going back to the early- to mid-1990s the way we hit it off again. I visited her once in Jacksonville, FL when I was in Atlanta, GA volunteering at Comdex for Team OS/2. She reminded me that imperfections are what make us human. We've all heard it before; "...gives it character," or "You are what you eat," or "To err is human...." They're not new aphorisms. But they are truisms.

We often take for granted these simple truths in life. We think we know them so well, we never give them a second thought. But have we ever even given the first thought a fair shake?

That's food for thought, isn't it? Many of these truisms we take for granted were just sayings we heard, accepted as true, and never bothered to think them through. Why are they true? Are they always true? It's profound. For many of you who try this, I am sure you will reach a state of being akin to being reborn--reborn into the world with your eyes wide open; reborn into the world with a higher state of consciousness.

They are often the most simple truths in life that we take for granted. That we take them for granted, by definition, means we never thought about them--never tested them. And that, by definition, means we don't know them.

Cullinan I: The Star of Africa (audio version)

2005-02-23T22:59:00.000-05:00

Cullinan I: The Star of Africa

2005-02-23T22:04:00.000-05:00

I read something today I really wish I hadn't. I didn't mean to; I was just strolling through the old message boards looking for old friends. What I didn't expect to see was my ex-wife (or, more properly, wife; we're not divorced) extolling the virtues of her new boyfriend. (But we did those things together, too...)

I staggered two virtual steps backwards and fell off the virtual cliff.

I guess it's because when you're the dumpee, you don't want to see the dumper having the time of their life--with someone else. With him. Notwithstanding the fact that we're both Catholic, and notwithstanding the fact that divorce is against our religion, she flaunts her new relationship as if it were the Star of Africa. (But we did those things together, too...)

Had I known what was in store less than a year after our fairy-tale wedding, I would never have wanted to bring our daughter into this broken family. I grew up in one. How could I curse my own blood with one?

But we did those things together, too.

My blog is born... (audio version)

2005-02-23T14:30:00.000-05:00

My blog is born...

2005-02-23T13:14:00.000-05:00

My cousin "Eve" in Montréal, a seasoned blogger, introduced me to this site. I've always wanted to leave behind some sort of legacy for my daughter when she grows older, that she might know more of her father, since we don't live together--that she might know more of the world into which she was born.

But since this is my first entry, I suppose I'd better give some context to my musings. So I apologize if this first post is rather lengthy and personal, but--hey, you don't have to read it!

My name is Robin L. M. Cheung. I was born in Alexandria, Ontario, Canada--a small hick town halfway between Ottawa (Canada's Capital) and Montréal, Québec. With a population of just over 2,000, my family were the only four Chinese members of the community. Being a farming town, my father, one of the four town physicians, led a busy life looking after not only the 2,000 town residents, but all the surrounding area residents.

I have a sister, 13 months younger, and a half-brother whom I have not seen since he was born in the late 1980s.

In 1985, my family moved the short hop to Ottawa. What shocked me the most, I guess, was that we were moving from one family home in Alexandria to two separate homes in Ottawa; my parents had legally separated years before and only now revealed it to my sister and me. Before I had a chance to deal with this shock, I realized also that my grade four education from Laggan Public School, about 15 minutes outside of Alexandria in Dalkeith, was not equivalent to the "big city" grade four. Still, I was placed in the enrichment program. When I went to high school, Lisgar Collegiate Institute, I was placed in the gifted program, to which I attibute much of my social ineptitude.

Having graduated from Lisgar, I commenced studies at Carleton University in Biology and Biotechnology. During this time, my life as a raver, DJ, and skydiver took over most of my life and my studies fell to the wayside, unfortunately. By some stroke of luck, I managed to graduate with a Bachelor of Science, Honours, in Biology and Biotechnology. By yet another stroke of luck, I was admitted to McMaster University's Master of Business Administration (MBA) program. I had only applied to McMaster because my sweetheart and later wife (and still later, ex-wife) and soul mate lived near Hamilton and I wanted to be near her always. We first met when I Ashley was 16 and I was 23 and fell in love immediately.

Completing my MBA, Ashley and I moved to Toronto where I worked as a Performance Measurement Consultant at CIBC head office.

November 17, 2002, I married my sweetheart and soul mate, Ashley, and later, July 6, 2003, our daughter was born. She was named Kaitlain Rita Lai Yee Cheung. Ashley and I chose the name Kaitlain because it was as pretty as she was. Lai Yee was chosen as her Chinese name by my father's mother--by then my sole surviving grandmother. I had been extremely close to my maternal grandmother, Rita Cheng, and always knew her to be a fighter, but she passed away in May 2003. She had only seen ultrasound pictures of her great-granddaughter. In her honour, my daughter's Catholic Saint's name became Rita.

Because I wanted to become a teacher, we moved to Ottawa and I began studies again. But the honeymoon was short-lived and September 12, 2003, Ashley returned with our baby to her parents' house in Smithville, Ontario. My heart was broken.

And thus began the rest of my life....