Leaderboard

I really wish I had the funding to determine the percentage of books, written by Black writers, that are sold, often exclusively, by Amazon. My conservative estimate would be at least 75%, but I would not be surprised if it were 90%. We know; By the fall of 2016, the share of online shoppers bypassing search engines and heading straight to Amazon had grown to 55 percent. Captures nearly $1 of every $2 that Americans spend online. Hosts a substantial portion of the largest websites Ships and sells products at a loss until competition is eliminated (the capital markets facilitate this, which also prevents the emergence new potentially better competition. it is Ma Bell all over again) Benefits from enormous, unnecessary, tax benefits Producers compelled to sell on Amazon resulting in lower profits, sales, and/or higher prices Will manufacture 3rd party products they sell selling well then bury the original producers products on their store Sell bootleg products The New York Times recently reported: “In Amazon’s bookstore, the unruly behavior has been widespread, aided by print-on-demand technology. Booksellers that seem to have no verifiable existence outside Amazon offer $10 books for $100 or even $1,000 on the site, raising suspicions of algorithms run wild or even money-laundering. The problem of fake reviews is so bad that the F.T.C. has already gotten involved.” Despite all of this and more people generally like Amazon. I also wish I had the time and money to explain to people Amazon's monopolies results in less profit for book sellers, publishers, and authors. Why readers see less diversity in reading material despite more books being produced than ever before and more. Nothing any individual can do alone will stop Amazon's domination In my corner of the world I am spending the time and energy to divorce myself from Amazon. It is not something I can do over night, because they are so firmly entrenched in the business of Black books -- indeed they own this business -- but I plan to do it. I have to do it. I'm also trying to help authors understand this as well, but authors are often more enamored of Amazon than the general public. Amazon poses a much larger threat the business of Black books and independent businesses than Google does.

@Delano , I figured you had but maybe not others. @Troy exactly, But Scientific method is fallible. It doesn't matter to me how many years they stick with a result - methods are faulty or there would never be a reason to discard a result. It reminds me of religious folks who say god is unchanging - that's completely ignorant statement ESPECIALLY when you dealing with the INFINITE and unseen. Which of course, is how I view people who put their faith in modern science too. Modern Science is just another crutch to deal with uncertainty. Scientific method has value because it forces people to use data to make sense of things...people like absolutes and tangibles but it's still a crutch. The value however is found in "conceptualization" or using one's imagination rather than stopping at it's "god's will". I recently read a piece on cryptocurrency that mentioned we humans have gone through three stages of organization and explanation so far, -THEISM - HUMANISM- DATAISM... Astrology relies on all three - planetary gods; human understanding and tracking the movements of the stars relies on data. although I've never heard astrologists claim absolutes except for when they are discussing the movement of the planets constellations et al. But who knows maybe that's not fixed either...

I think you are right about this. All too often I attended book events where men are overly represented as the authors and panelists and the attendees and event organizers are mostly women. I hope you are right about my gender not getting in the way.

@Troy , I'd say yes but I don't know enough about astrology to even share an informed opinion. But CONSIDER ( etymonline : from Latin considerare "to look at closely, observe," probably literally "to observe the stars," from assimilated form of com "with, together" (see con-) + sidus (genitive sideris) "heavenly body, star, constellation" (see sidereal).Perhaps a metaphor from navigation, but more likely reflecting Roman obsession with divination by astrology.) this, astrology hails from a time of Natural Philosophy - which predates modern science. This is one of the reasons why some of the words in our language (latin) are star-based. I mentioned the scientific method didn't come into existence until the 17th century but modern humans (i.e. "Africans", kushites, Aksumites, Romans, were dabbling in Natural Philosophy long before Anglos took the "scientific" reins. So, while Astrology isn't recognized today as a hard science maybe that too has to do with politics. Aside: I did a quick search to see if anyone ever got a PhD in the field of Astrology and it appears "Patrice Guinard was awarded the first PhD in astrology in 1993 from Sorbonne University" Here's some links if anyone wants to do a deep dive http://cura.free.fr/histo.html http://www.astrology-and-science.com/p-guin2.htm

More women sign up, buy books, and provide financial support. For, this reason I think if I were a Black woman the site would probably be more successful as my inherent biases would more easily match my demographic, making me better able to select more appealing books for the site. Yesterday I added over 100 books to the site that are soon to be published. One title, a memoir, All Boys Aren't Blue is a book I have zero interest in personally, but I added it to the site because I suspect some of my readers would be interested in it. If I only added books that was only personally passionate about I would have a much smaller audience and far fewer books on the site. Besides I get my kicks from turning people on to books and writers they come to love. I also think woman, especially younger ones, have an advantage when it comes to the media, whuch would also help the site. But no, I don't think any regular visitor is turned off by a Brother running the site.

True, like religion and astrology right? Yep somethings are untestable would you put astrology in that category?

Even science is an opinion. That is until there's consensus through experimentation that result in the same outcome for everyone who uses the prescribed method. Unfortunately, that still doesn't make it gospel as many theoretical scientists are learning today. While repeating the same method may get the same outcome but when someone else comes along using a different method and gets yet another outcome we're left with more questions. Any way the scientific method is still young (17th century) and it rest on the fact that we have is agreement since we're taught not question authority. I imagine if civilization last another millennia - they are going to look back at us like we're barbarians.

Apparently this is "a thing" among the retarded adult set. What's a suitable punishment? I dunno, but 20 years seems a bit much. I presume she got off scot-free which is not right. I think they should cane people here in the US. Ariana should get at least 5 smacks on her butt. I bet she won't do it again.

A couple of years ago Ariana Grande was caught licking a donut.

,Saw On Video,, South Carolina. A. Black. Woman. Was. Giving. A. Performance,Pretending. She. Was. The. Great. Harriet. Tubman.,Council. Of. Negro Women. Have. Black. Family,Reunions,Each. Summer. . The. Cookbook. Has 250-Recipes.. Book By Black Family Research Council....

She got tired of the pointlessness, the fuzzy logic, typos, lack of humour, and lack of mind or spirit expanding topics.

@Pioneer1 life is complicated man. Often it is difficult to make sense of it. For example, I would love for the larger Black community to embrace what I do here simply because I'm a Black man against struggling against massive corporations, who intend to exploit us, to support Black culture and people here on the web. I just does not work that way. I see people on Twitter, for example retweeting and commenting on 45's nonsense. Sure they mean well but they are only helping Twitter and counterintuitively 45. I wish these very same people would retweet my posts that are actually promotes their work, or writers that they want supported. Some even advertise on the site. So it is not that they don't support, but too much of what we do with our energy and time can undermine what we do with our money. @Cynique's contributions here were prodigious. I named the forum for her (though I honestly I was a bit sadden by her using a typo on this honor as a passing swipe rather than her just letting me know). However she spends time on Facebook not once sharing any of her brilliant posts here on the platform. Why? Maybe she wanted to keep her online lives separate. It really does not matter. The bottom line is that most people do this. They easily share trivial utterances made on social media but rarely share major coverage here. They'll gladly do it when asked, but it is not automatic. Right niw I'm too busy maintaining the site to worry about a succession plan. If the last 20 years are an indicator, the next 20 will be rough. I do recognize people do not live forever. The reality is most businesses fail and the vast majoirity don't outlive their founders. Mult-gereational survival is not in AALBC's favor, but you've all given me something to think about Thanks

Troy may be inclined to agree with most of these statements (found in the title as well as the 1st post) made but I disagree with key aspects of them. 1. Perception isn't necessarily a "hallucination". Traditionally speaking, a "hallucination" is an image or sound that a person can perceive that no others around him can. If most of the people in your environment can also observe it then it's not a hallucination. 2. Perception is a PERSPECTIVE. It's a WAY OF seeing something or someone that other people can see as well. Other's may have a DIFFERENT perception than you but they and you are still observing the same thing. You're on the porch and you both SEE and HEAR a man bouncing a basket ball down the street. Another person inside the house who may not be looking outside the window at the time can HEAR him but not see him. Another person looking out the window with earplugs in their ears may SEE him bouncing the ball but don't hear it. None of you are hallucinating because you are all observing the SAME reality but from different perspectives. Now to the statement that "facts don't change minds"....... This statement isn't entirely correct. It's true for SOME MINDS and for other minds it's false. I'm not going to go into James Clear's article but I'll just focus on the statement itself. It's been my observation that one of the major reasons information offered as "facts" don't change the minds of many people is because what is being called "facts" is often just mere INFORMATION printed up up paper and presented to them by people with an agenda and that mere INFORMATION often times not only goes against their established beliefs but also against their PERSONAL EXPERIENCES AND OBSERVATIONS. You can present "facts" that Americans are healthier and living longer today than they were in the past all you want, but a 70 year old man who WITNESSED an era where as a child he didn't see nearly the amount of sick people he's seeing today AND he routinely saw people who claimed to be 110 and 120 years old walking up and down the old dusty roads of his home town while the oldest person in America today is said to be only 114 -will not believe these so-called "facts" because they don't agree with his personal observations. I'm amazed at how many people insist that simply offering others data or information should be enough to just "change their minds" about life.

All of my sistas here have really done themselves proud in offering explanations about their approaches to interacting with other women - as well as men. Each testament was flavored with their individual personalities and provided clues to why they are so impressive. I have concluded that one difference between them and me is that i am more argumentive and when it comes to engaging with men, i like to question everything they say just to be contrary even as, on this forum, i cringed at their written responses that had little regard for being detailed-oriented or proof read, full of disjointed sentences, misspelled, omitted, improperly-used words, and incorrect punctuation, wondering if these careless lapses carried over into other areas of their lives and have anything to do with their claims of black male victimization. I am really not sure whether your parting shot was a lame attempt at humor or if you really think that i actually entertained ideas of "hooking up" with pioneer. EW. But, I understand how observers might conclude that making him my whipping boy is motivated by my having secret designs on him. He modestly interprets my "harassment" as an attraction to the "masculine energy" which he imagines he exudes. Sooo untrue. I, myself, always felt that his aura was like a drag, mired in the sticky emanations that seeped from his pompous assertions. But dream on, pioneer. As usual, what you decide upon takes on a life on its own and settles into a permanent residence in your warped mentality. Be advised that you have earned a place in my "Obnoxious People Hall of Fame". I'd also like to clear up what i think others might suspect: that i looked upon this site as my personal domain and that i jealously guarded my status here, considering all other comers a threat, and that i competed with them for Troy's attention. In response, i say: it's not like this forlorn forum is bristling with activity and broad participation and enjoys widespread recognition. On a good day, there might be 4 posters here, bickering or exchanging one-liners. I'm told there is a substantial lurker audience who, for some reason, never make themselves known and are who pioneer plays to, positive that they are in his corner, rooting him on. Does this sound like a scenario that my life would revolve around, something that would bolster my self-esteem and make my day? Not. What benefits accrue from Troy's approval? Sure, he's a great guy but my being a fixture on his discussion board enhanced or enabled me in no way. My critics got it all wrong. So, yes, Troy, remove the "Cynique" title from this site. Free me from having to see what should be Cynique's Corner instead of "Cyniques' Corner", which is how it incorrectly appears. i'm pretty much history here. "Connie" has more fun on Facebook, hangin' out with my homies, laughing at memes and arguing with a broad spectrum of strangers, Mark Zuckerberg be damned. Sure, out of curiosity, I'll be checking things out here from time to time - if you don't block me. Thanks for everything. We cool. (That goes for you too, Del.) To my girls, i love you all. It's been "real". Buh-Bye!