(Macro) Inspiration

Every writer knows those times when they feel that it's all been said before, or that someone is currently saying what they are inclined say in a well enough manner, so why be redundant? As far as our lovely Iceland is concerned, there are so many wonderful sources for current events and entertainment online (my facebook news feed alone is full-to-brim with amazing talent!) that it seems right to just let them do the talking in words and in pictures.

And after seven years and 596 posts, I sometimes wonder what compels me to keep on with this little hobby, which has become much more complex a package now that the social media tide has swept into our lives. I'm told by "experts" that to make anything of this site I'm to invite visitors to like/follow me in all sorts of different ways (see left, though I balked at creating an email list to spam you even more cleverly with, my dears.) And now the invisible pressure to do what the rest of the active universe is doing, i.e. tweeting, posting, emailing, G+-ing, and blogging has boggled this poor soul's mind.

I like to assume that you are all intelligent creatures, and that for you, like me, less is more. A few photos per post, succinct text with relevant links (though sometimes obscure if a site is really worth linking to) and a clean, uncluttered template is what I offer because it's what I look for in other websites. I've always tried to steer clear of repeating local/national news because I read most of it myself in an RSS reader or just Google 'Iceland news,' which I assume you all can/will do yourselves. Furthermore, I get that most of you won't even read this far because we live in the age of the Image. A pretty macro picture of 1cm long seashells on an Icelandic beach may make you pause for an appreciative instant before moving on to the next visual of our glorious existence here on post-millennial Earth, but you may not absorb more. I get that. It's what I often do.

So this writer is a pocket photographer with an uncanny, irrepressible urge to share with all of you. But maybe, because I'm from the pre-silicon solid-state-and-steel era, I become confounded by the myriad of mediums I am to use to communicate my simple photos and words.

Right now I am obsessed with macro shots of the delicate flora and fauna we pass by in our everyday lives, and I'm not sure that I would want to flood you with the incredibly small in every post. I do want to let you all know, though, that I have a few albums of life here in Reykjavik available for viewing via Picasa* and/or Google+, and that my soul is crafting slowly and with care my novel, which is a love letter to this island. I'll be sharing bits and vignettes in the near future. In addition, I will be posting to our facebook page though maybe sporadically for now.

 Thank you all for your patience and for your encouragement. It means a lot. Much love and grace to you all ~.~

*Here are three albums you might enjoy (please view them enlarged, starting with the first one : ) Secret Reykjavik, The Secret Life of Iceland, Ridiculously Beautiful Flowers, Iceland Poppy 

Have you tried Dynamic Viewing yet? Five new views in all. Use the blue tab at the top of the view page to check them all out : )

Korczak

On Thursday night I watched an extraordinary musical at the Rose Theatre in Kingston-upon-Thames.  I'd like to share with you the story behind the musical, my impressions of it, and the work of Youth Music Theatre UK.

At 4.48am, 1 September, 72 years ago, the Germans opened fire on Westerplatte in Poland: the opening salvo in what was to become World War 2.  After two incredibly tense days, at 11am today (3 September 1939) Chamberlain took to the wireless with the news that the Government's ultimatum had expired and the British Empire was at war with Germany.  Over 60 million would die.

The Story

Warsaw is a city of tragedies. In 1939 it was an elegant city, the home to a flourishing community of over 350,000 Jews - around 30% of its population.  Warsaw was the jewel in the crown of European Jewry.  At the end of the war fewer than 10 buildings were still standing in the Old and New Towns combined.  85% of the whole Warsaw metropolitan area had been wiped off the map on Hitler's personal orders, whilst the Red Army had remained on the opposite side of the Vistula watching the smoke rise in late 1944.  By 1945, some 90% of Poland's 3 million strong Jewish population had been murdered by the Nazis.  A further 3 million non-Jewish Poles had also died.  Just pause for a moment and think about these numbers: almost 20% of the country's entire population had been killed.  What for us were painful, crushing losses were in fact 0.9% and 0.3% for the UK and the US respectively.

For a single story to stand out in that crushing narrative, it must be extraordinary.  One does: the tale of Janusz Korczak and his 192 orphans.  They were amongst the millions caught up in the terrifying German "Blitzkrieg" onslaught on Poland.  Their story is not too widely told and it deserves to be.

This is where Nick Stimson's work in writing "Korczak" and the YMT in putting on this musical theatre piece come in.

"Old Doctor" Korzack

Janusz Korzack (born Henryk Goldszmit) was a Polish Jewish doctor who was light years ahead of his time in terms of attitudes.  He had studied in Berlin and ran an orphanage in Warsaw in which he encouraged his children to govern themselves and take responsibility.  The kids had their own democratic parliament, court and newspaper.  By all accounts he treated them with great love and enlightenment, which obviously were not at all typical for the era.  He was 61 years old in September 1939 and was known as "Old Doctor" by his charges.

In October 1940 the 30% Jewish population of Warsaw was crammed into 2.4% of its area as the infamous Ghetto was created.  These were people many of whom had relatives and friends in Britain and in America, who nervously waited for news of what was happening to people they knew and loved.  Korzack's orphange was forced to move three times.  I was in Warsaw this summer with my own group of American high school students on a two week holocaust education tour.  I took them everywhere I could related to Korzack including the last location of his orphanage.  It is still a children's home today.  Its physical building somehow survived the annihilation that moved General Eisenhower to say of the Polish capital "“I have seen many towns destroyed, but nowhere have I been faced with such destruction.”

For almost 2 years Korczak did everything he could to feed his children in an environment where people were literally starving to their deaths on the streets of the Ghetto.  On 6 August 1942 Korzack and his children were rounded up at their orphanage.  This was as part of the "clearing" of the ghetto (just 100 or so SS soldiers were involved in the rounding up of almost 300,000 people in the course of two months in late 1942).

Liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto

Eyewitness Joshua Perle wrote of the scene:

A miracle occurred. Two hundred children did not cry. Two hundred pure souls, condemned to death, did not weep. Not one of them ran away. None tried to hide. Like stricken swallows they clung to their teacher and mentor, to their father and brother, Janusz Korczak, so that he might protect and preserve them. On all sides the children were surrounded by Germans, Ukrainians, and this time also Jewish policemen. They whipped and fired shots at them. The very stones of the street wept at the sight of the procession.

Umschlagplatz Memorial Warsaw

Korzack himself was given the opportunity (by some accounts twice) to escape the Ghetto immediately before the deportation and save his own life.  Instead he took the cattle train from the Warsaw "Umschlagplatz" with his orphans for the 100 km journey out to the (even today) incredibly remote camp known as Treblinka.

Treblinka was a very different camp even to Auschwitz, where there was the possibility of selection and survival for some time, at least for fit adult "prisoners".  It was a pure death camp: a killing factory.  Some Jews were kept back to the do the work of processing new arrivals: they themselves would then be killed a few weeks or months later.  The boast was that within 2 hours of arrival all new arrivals would be murdered.  Unlike the vast majority of other concentration camps it did not require an electric fence: it was designed to massacre people, not to house them.  It is tiny: the size of a couple of soccer fields in total.

Images from Treblinka this July

We do not know how many people were killed in Treblinka.  The standard estimate is a minimum of 800,000; if the figures of a villager who kept meticulous records of the numbers of train arrivals are believed - and accurately extrapolated - it could be as high as 1,200,000.  This is greater even than Auschwitz.  After an armed uprising in 1943, the camp was closed.  600 Jews had escaped: just 40 survived the War.  This is a major reason the place is not in our consciousness: hardly anyone survived. 40 out of 800,000 is a 0.005% survival rate.  99.995% died.

At the camp there are jagged stones of different sizes to represent the murdered communities of Poland (middle picture, above).  The names of the towns and villages appear on the stones.  Just one person is honoured with an individual mention.  His name is Janusz Korzack.

The Musical

This seems a highly difficult subject matter to put to the medium of a musical theatre.  I was quite apprehensive.  I attended with Eva Schloss, an 82 year old whose mother had married Otto Frank after the War.  As a Jewish refugee from Austria, she had lived opposite Anne Frank as a child in Amsterdam, and now travels the world devoting herself to Holocaust education.  She is genuinely an amazing, warm, funny, lovely soul.

At the drinks reception we attended beforehand an elderly Jewish man approached Eva and asked in a thick Central European accent "Were you Kindertransport?"... "No" she answered in her lovely Viennese sing-song accent.. "I was in Auschwitz."  At this point all I could do is just look on and apply some perspective in my life. 

Eva and I in Amsterdam this summer

The musical was performed by Youth Music Theatre UK.  The cast of 40 (with the exception of Korczak played by West End professional Peter Straker) were all aged 11 to 21 years old.  They had come from all over the UK and had worked 12 hour days for 2 weeks before hand.  The orchestra was also of the same age.

I can't describe their performance as anything other than breathtakingly good.  The energy, the quality of the singing and the music, the total complete passion that these kids put in was extraordinary.  The narrative of the actual story lost me somewhat, as did the sub-plots (such as a rather sweet love triangle) but it mattered not one bit.  The professionalism of the cast, the quality of the production and the stamina of these kids to sing and play for 2.5 hours were astounding.  The scenes were not as upsetting as might be imagined: the enduring image I have was of Korczak telling the children the story of the Pied Piper of Hamelin and that they would be entering a wonderful place: the Crystal Mountain.  They do not die at the end so much as burst into a celebration of hope, life and peace.

After the show Eva and I were able to go backstage to meet the cast.  She spoke to them of how she had been 15 herself when she was deported to Auschwitz and was lucky to have survived the intitial selection.  She had lost her father and brother in the camps.  She told them how important it was to her that they had been part of getting the story of Korczak out there, and that she hoped they would remember being part of this throughout their lives.  Several of them were in floods of tears listening to her.  She asked me to address them about my work with kids over the years visiting the camps and specifically my latest trip with students to Treblinka and Warsaw.  I wasn't expecting to do this and somewhat stumbled through it, but hey.

It is endlessly difficult to envisage the victims of the holocaust as individuals.  There is no holocaust: there are in fact six million different individual holocausts.  Seeing these children singing and acting at the Rose Theatre had such an effect on me.  It somehow made me realise far more properly that the 192 orphans were actual young people, like these kids we met: living beings with hopes, fears, aspirations.  The vulnerability of the young and the role of adults in protecting and inspiring them came through so strongly.  The performance is billed as the "The triumph of hope over death, ... music theatre at its best".  How to explain: it was just exactly that.

The performers have been brought together by a remarkable organisation.  YMT is the UK's leading national music theatre company for young people.  They work with hundreds of young people each year, and if this production is anything to go by, they do a sterling job of it.  I really do hope they will be able to put this piece on again in time.  The current show ends tonight, 3 September.  If you are free tonight and can get to Kingston, ring the box office and just go.  I so strongly recommend it.  If not, watch their other work.  I shall be.

Korczak Memorial, Warsaw

Janusz Korczak wrote: "What should we do when everyone acts less than human? We must act more than human."

Youth Music Theatre UK are on Twitter: @ymtuk

How to Use Twitter

More and more people are joining Twitter, and plenty leave it soon enough too, failing to understand the attraction or how it works.  This is my attempt at a "definitive guide" that brings together what I've learned during my time on here.

(The real basics of how @mentions etc work are at the very bottom.  If you are brand new to Twitter it might make more sense to read them first.  If you're more than a complete novice begin here with these 17 items)

1. Getting Started: Follow People

When you first join Twitter you have a big empty box with a "What's Happening" question.  It doesn't exactly look enticing.  I've heard it compared to buying a new TV, unwrapping it, and there being no signal.

It's no fun if you're tweeting and no one will read what you say, or comment on it, and you have nothing to read yourself.  The key to the quality of your experience will therefore be getting interesting people to follow, to follow you, and above all to interact with.  This can seem like quite a daunting task: it took me a good year and quite a lot of effort to build up a group of people whose tweets amuse, entertain, cheer me up, inform, comfort or challenge me.  However, there are some short cuts.

It's important to remember that the whole basis of Twitter is getting to know people.  You don't have to know someone in real life to follow them.  Don't be shy: you just click follow and people will do the same to you.  It's all very informal and friendly in a way that going up to strangers in real life social situations just wouldn't be.

TIP: The quick, really practical way round this is as follows.  Find someone you know in real life, who introduced you to Twitter, or whose bio you like the sound of.  Often this person will have created a list or lists to follow specific people.  The lists have names like "People I talk to" / "Labour tweeps" / "Cricket Fans"  / "Twitterati" / "Business Class".

Whatever they call it, a list is their favourite people, perhaps sorted according to category relating to the type of people they are or what they tweet about.  Just subscribe to that list.  You'll instantly have access to someone else's work over a space of time in sorting people they like. The list will show all the tweets of that group of people.  Just follow those whose tweets you like and you'll build up a timeline very rapidly that will interest you.

ANOTHER TIP: When looking for interesting people to follow, it can be hard to glean from their timeline, particularly if they have been having lots of conversations with people and you can't therefore easily see the type of general thing they tweet that will appear in your timeline.  Have a quick look at their favourite tweets instead.  These can reveal a huge amount of the type of personality they are.  It's also a way of finding more great people who tweeted the thing that was favourited.

2. Your Bio

It sounds obvious, but make your bio vaguely interesting or funny.  People decide who to follow on a combination of their bio, their picture, the things they've tweeted or people they follow in common.

TIP: Very few people follow back an "Egg".  If you want to be anonymous: fine... but choose a more interesting avatar than the default one.  They're also often seen as belonging to someone who has set up a "troll" account (more later) and often won't even be responded to, let alone followed back.

3. Celebrities

Many people start off on Twitter following loads of celebrities, who tend to have a gazillion followers.  Twitter is, for me, about interacting with people.  Someone who has 3 million followers and only follows 58 of their celeb friends will never follow you back or talk to you.  They can often also tend to be *incredibly* dull.  Do you really want to know what Paris Hilton had for supper.. do you?

TIP: Obvs therefore don't start off by following loads of celebs.  They're frequently quite dull and just use Twitter as a platform.  You'll find interactions with ordinary people far more rewarding.  Follow a few and see what I mean.  Yawnski. The only exception to this is @chordoverstreet whom you MUST follow cos he's the hot blond boy from GLEE! and I don't care his tweets are as dull as dishwater.

It's Chord :o))

(By the way, "celebrities" are not the same as people tweeting information.  If you're interested in current affairs you'll find some of the politicians, reporters or commentators superb.  They don't tend to follow back, but who cares if they're putting out interesting, informative stuff.)

4. Interact

The quality of your Twitter experience will be directly determined by the level you interact.  If someone tweets something interesting or funny, engage with them on it.  You don't have to know the person - as I mentioned Twitter is far more informal than real life, and in most cases the person will reply and appreciate the fact someone has reacted to something they have said.  The whole beauty of Twitter is the easy interaction that is possible just by clicking on reply.

TIP: Be good at responding back yourself when someone talks to you.  It's polite and kind to acknowledge a compliment.  Even just a smile or a "thanks!" is enough.  Twitter can be a little shouting into a dark cave: you've no idea who is listening when you tweet something.  If someone has gone to the trouble of directing something back to you in response, take a second to respond.  If you don't you'll soon find that person gives up trying to talk to you.

5. Following and Unfollowing

It's actually really okay to follow and unfollow people.  We all get upset if we lose someone whom we spoke to and liked, but there can be all sorts of reasons for it.  You may not have spoken in a while; you may find you've actually not got that much in common over time.  It may (actually) be Twitter playing up.  It's not like de-friending someone on Facebook - it's a lot more relaxed on here.

I've sometimes unfollowed someone just because I was a bit a bored by them or annoyed by something they said, and then refollowed them some time later.  We ALL take things personally, but do try to toughen up on this front or you will get unnecessarily upset.  Not everyone will like everything you have to say or appreciate your humour.  It doesn't matter.

@LassieOscar just unfollowed me!

TIP: If someone unfollows you, don't do a shout out (e.g. "OMG @lassieoscar just unfollowed me!"  You'll look a tit, frankly.  Your other followers won't appreciate it and the person who did the unfollowing will be embarrassed. Send them an @message directly instead if you're that bothered and want to know the reason - it may not be as upsetting as you think.

ANOTHER TIP: If you're following someone and they don't follow you back: so what?  I've got people I've followed for a full year now who have not followed me back.  I find them interesting, can still interact with them and I'm happy.  Following on from this, if you were mutually following and the person unfollows you, think for a moment about whether to unfollow them back just for the sake of it.  Do you really want to lose them if they've got something to say you enjoy?  We're not 8 years old so don't be a big kid.

YET ANOTHER TIP: Don't stake your "Twitter Esteem" on how many people follow you.  I know of people with 5000 followers who frankly are no more interesting than those with 200 followers.  A real find is someone who has been on here ages, has 30 followers, but is just a delight to talk to.  Similarly don't follow someone back because they have loads of followers, but ignore someone who has been pleasant, kind or funny but who happens to have a low number of followers.  Everyone started off with 0 followers at some point.

6. Spam and Trolls

You'll soon come across the, erm, wonderful world of spam and trolls.

SPAMBOTS - tend to be women with improbable names and oversized cleavage, frequently based somewhere like North Dakota, who have silly bios about what they like doing and the fact they're a "genuine, kind person".  Look at their timeline and you'll see all they are doing is sending links to websites which will be selling things.  They may follow you, or may appear in your @ mentions.

TROLLS are real people who you don't know, whom you don't follow, who will respond to something you tweeted in a negative way.  This could be because they did a search for a word you mentioned, or because your tweet was retweeted by one of your followers and they came across it that way.  They will generally be obnoxious and up for an argument.  There are degrees of trolling: some people like to be keyboard warriors, others genuinely get off on being personally unpleasant to strangers.  That says everything about them and nothing about you.

TIP: The good Lord invented the "Block" and "Report Spam" settings for a reason!  Don't let either category disturb your enjoyment of Twitter.  If you want to argue with a troll you'll quickly find it pointless, draining and annoying.  Resist the temptation to engage, and either ignore or block.  When you block their messages will never appear in your @ mentions again.

7. Bullying

Twitter can be a superb place.  It has constantly shown me a far better, warmer, more optimistic side to humanity than the press would suggest exists about us.  It's a true democracy in many respects: in many cases it doesn't matter what you have or who you are, it matters what your personality is and what your thoughts are.  Huzzah!

However, there's a flip side.  Never forget that Twitter is only a medium: it's made up by people.  And what's more, it's people sitting at home mouthing off from the safety of the Internet.  They may be judgemental, forthright or even rude in a way they would not consider acceptable in real life.  It's too easy to overstep the mark: try not to forget that a real person will be receiving your tweet and reading it.  You may disagree about things - but is it really appropriate to be abusive or nasty?

Yes, she's a real person too

TIP: Imagine this.  You think Sally Bercow shouldn't have appeared on Big Brother and is a silly cow.  That's your opinion: I disagree, but you're entitled to think that.  If you want to communicate that by tweeting "God Sally Bercow came across as a dumb cow tonight" this is quite different to tweeting "God @SallyBercow came across as a dumb cow tonight".  In the second case you have @mentioned her and she will see that tweet.  Whatever you think of her a real person will be reading this.

Is it really nice, necessary and a good thing to let this woman (about whom all of us actually know very little) see this nasty comment?  Does it make you feel good?  Have you even thought about its effect? It's actually nothing short of bullying.  I'd like to think most people would not be so abusive to the recipient if they did meet them in real life.  Don't do it, please.  This counts both for Sally and someone "ordinary" you've just had an argument about politics with.

8. Reading everything

When you're following say 50 people, you will probably want to read everything everyone has said in your timeline.  It becomes impossible as you hit say 200 people that you follow.  With 500, forget it entirely - you can be away from your phone or computer for an afternoon and return to 1000 new tweets to read.  This will do your head in if you try to keep up with everything.

TIP: Treat Twitter like a virtual pub.  You pop in, you chat to your mates, or just listen to what they have been up to and have to say without saying too much yourself.  You then leave.  You cannot possibly know everything that everyone has said when you weren't there.  This is perfectly okay.  (If someone really interests you, you can go to their timeline and catch up on their specific tweets for the last couple of days of course.)

9. Butting in on conversations

It's easy to forget that your conversation is public.  If someone follows you and the other party to the conversation this third person will see the whole thing.  Sometimes people will chip in and this can be great and good fun.

TIP: Unless you have something interesting to add (or know the other two really well), and you are the "third party" be just a bit sensitive about butting in.  In many circumstances it's absolutely fine, and it's the nature of the forum.  However in others, it can be a bit rude and might not be appreciated.

10. Trust and Anonymity

Social media depends on trust.  I've had three quite yuk instances of people building up entirely false personae on here - I've blogged on two of them.  It's shitty behaviour and yes it does matter.  It makes people distrust Twitter, it discredits the vast majority of people who are simply themselves, and as media lawyer @JackofKent blogged "just because it's Twitter" is no excuse.  Any legal offences on here are just as real as those "in real life".  If you've weaseled your way into people's lives and then defraud them, that offence is just as real.  If you pretend to be a teacher or doctor on Twitter, people may ask you for advice.  If you're neither of those things this could actually cause real damage.

What's more, people will catch you out. If you say you've been to Malaysia recently, someone on here will actually have been and ask you about things they know about.  What's the point, frankly?  You think that lying or exaggerating will make you more interesting?  Honestly it won't.

There is of course a world of difference between lying about being someone you're not, and choosing to be anonymous, but being yourself.  Oddly, I have actually never once thought the sensational @RedEaredRabbit is actually a rabbit with red ears.  He is someone who chooses to remain private about his identity; people do this for any number of reasons and it is absolutely fine.  He is funny, warm, intelligent and wonderful - that's reason enough for me to follow him.  He is not claiming to be something he is not.

TIP: Don't be a wanker and pretend you're Cameron's personal advisor.  People will (eventually) catch you out on your lies.


11. Retweets

Retweets can be great: it's a way of sharing interesting things on Twitter and a key strength of the medium.  You see people who have interesting things to say and may end up following them as a result.  However, endless retweets by people can be BLOODY boring.  Just because you agree with something, do you need to flood other people's timelines with retweets?  There's a temptation to do this if you're a bit unsure of yourself or feel you need to contribute something - but stop and think whether it really adds something to everyone who is following you before hitting "retweet" every 2 minutes.  It's a balancing act: look at the ratio of your tweets versus RTs you're doing.  I never follow anyone whose timeline is just full of RTs. 

TIP: You can switch off people's RTs on Twitter on the Internet (select the person's profile and then the drop down menu next to the little head symbol).  I've done this for people who RT too much, but whom I like.  I want to know what they have to say, not what someone else does.  I know you can pick up interesting people to follow through RTs, but with 900 odd people I follow already, that's enough for me at this stage.  It makes my timeline much calmer and more manageable to have switched off selected people's RTs.

12. Fridays

The natural pattern of the Twitter week is people being depressed it's Monday, building up to near Class A drug induced joy at the arrival of a Friday.  Watch people's moods changing: it's amazing as Friday afternoon hits!  Saturdays are equally fab and then towards Sunday evenings it all comes crashing back down again.

On Fridays many engage in something called "Follow Fridays" - though it is happening less than it used to.  If you happen to join Twitter on a Friday you'll think we're all Moonies.  Actually what is going on is people are recommending to their followers to follow someone they like, for example "#FF @HyperbolicGoat he's amazing."  If you're new and someone you like has done an #FF like this, by all means take up the recommendation.  However, most people seem to use this simply as a way of saying "I really like @Hyperbolicgoat and want him to know that."

TIPS: You don't need to do #FFs.  It can become really tricky to do, as you don't want to inadvertently miss out people you like who might be offended.  I gave up ages ago.  If someone does #FF you, thank them for it - it's just good manners and actually how lovely they like you so much as to mention you like this.

ANOTHER TIP:  How about #FFing just one person a week that you have a special reason to do this for?  Actually explain it in the tweet - compare the simple "#FF @Peterl_77" (which says very little, if anything) and "#FF @PeterL_77 He's warm, funny, flies the flag for Labour, consistently tweets thought-provoking stuff and was so kind to me this week" (which gives people a much better idea of the person you're recommending/ and acknowledges him personally.)

13. Abbreviations, Hashtags, Asterisks

There is a whole set of abbreviations which again may make you feel like you have to learn a new language.  They're actually really simple.  We've dealt with "#FF".  Here are some more:

• RT: a manual way of doing a retweet.  You copy and paste someone's tweet and can add your own comment to supplement it
• MT: modified tweet.  That's an RT that you've changed in some way and you want to make it clear you are not misrepresenting the original statement because you've amended it
• "HT" is "heard through" or "hat tip".  It's a way of acknowledging that someone else put you on to a news story or a piece of information.  It's good etiquette to do this: people get upset if you're ripping off material and passing it off as if you discovered it 
• "IRL" is not a country with Dublin as its capital, but "in real life"
•  "<THIS!" doesn't stand for anything - it actually literally means "this".  The tweeter is generally saying s/he agrees strongly with something that they have put in an RT.  

On top of this there are the usual text speak abbreviations like "lol" / "rofl" / "lmao" / "omg" / "zomg" etc.  If you don't know them ask a 13 year old for a full run down.
Hashtags are a way of flagging up a particular subject so that anyone can see all the tweets on a particular subject by doing a search.  "#XFactor" and "#BBCQT" are popular ones.  You tweet something like: "Did he REALLY just make that comment?! #BBCQT" and everyone knows you're referring to something that just happened on Question Time.

Hashtags can be really silly - and therefore superb fun - eg. #imnotreallyatotalpervhonest.  This is hard to explain, you'll just get the knack of it.  No one is ever going to do a search for that hashtag.

If you're using a 3rd party app such as Echofon you can mute certain hashtags, so tweets about, for example Question Time do not appear on your timeline.

Asterisks are normally used to EMPHASISE - eg "this is *superb* fun"... or to show an action about yourself in the 3rd person- eg "*goes off sobbing*  You can also capitalise for emphasis but that comes across as shouting.  This can of course be used ironically or for self-parody.

TIP: The ultimate #FAIL in Twitterquette is to steal someone's tweet and pretend you wrote it yourself (This is called Twagerism.) Always acknowledge the author of a tweet by either RTing it with their name, or saying HT (heard through) with their name.  This is a consistent, wonderful self-imposed rule on Twitter adhered to by at least 99% of people.  It's theft of ideas and you risk being tweleminated for breaching this rule! (not really, but people won't like you very much, so there.)

Asterix. *Never* to be confused with Asterisks.

14. Twitter Breaks

A really Twitter good friend told me he'd had enough with Twitter and was leaving.  I asked him to reconsider.  He'd built up a really great following and if he hit delete all that would be gone.  I suggested he take a couple of weeks' break instead and come back to it if he wanted.  His followers wouldn't have gone anywhere.  I'm glad he's done just that and I hope he'll be back.

TIP:  If you're not in a mood for being sociable, you can also take another shorter type of break.  Just read your timeline and don't tweet yourself.  I sometimes do this of an evening and it's wonderful.  It's just great seeing people chatting and knowing what they're up to without having to contribute yourself.  Sounds obvious, I know.

15. The Daily Mail

We ALL hate it.  The Mail hates Twitter and all those who sail in her.  It is the way of the world.  We even refer to it as the #FAIL and everyone knows what we're talking about.  End of.

16. Libel (added post Lord McAlpine/ Newsnight)

There's been much said about Twitter users and defaming people.  I've done my preachy bit too, here. 
It's really very simple.  If you tweet something that damages someone's reputation, that's every bit as defamatory on Twitter as it is in real life.  You can avoid liability if you can prove the statement is true, but read the tip on that point and think very carefully.  Pressing "retweet" is almost certainly a "republication" of someone else's libel and therefore a fresh offence by you.  It is no defence to say that you are repeating an allegation made by someone else.  Anonymity will not help you if the lawyers of the person aggrieved are determined to track you down. 

Damages in libel cases can run into the tens of thousands of pounds.  Aside from the legal aspect, there's the moral one: it isn't harmless fun to destroy someone's life by suggesting that they are a paedophile, for example.  A libel on Twitter can be both by a general tweet and by a direct message: what matters is that you say something "bad" about someone and a minimum of just one other person reads it.

TIP:  Apply this test: could the thing that you are about to tweet about someone been seen as damaging a reputation?  If so, do you know it is true, as opposed to believing it to be true, or have heard from someone else that it's true?  Does your confidence go so far as to be able to stand in court and demonstrate this?  Consider that the burden of proof flips in libel cases: you will have to prove on a balance of probabilities that a defamatory statement is true.  If you're happy, tweet away.  If not, don't.

[disclaimer: I am not a practising solicitor and this should be seen as general guidance, not replied upon as an exhaustive explanation of the law that you should rely upon.  If in doubt, contact a solicitor]

17. Favouriting Tweets

You can hit the favourite key and a tweet will then be saved to your favourites.  I've already mentioned that this can be a handy way to find out what someone is like, or to find new people to follow.

People use favouriting in different ways, and this has changed recently for many people.  It used to be a way of keeping a few select tweets that you really liked for prosperity.  It was also used by many to "bookmark" a tweet for later: for example a Youtube clip that you want to watch when you are at home and have wifi, rather than using up data allowances on your phone.

Recently however people have been using "favourite" increasingly as a "like" feature as on Facebook.  It's a quick way of acknowledging a tweet that was sent to you, or bringing a polite end to a conversation.  I most amusingly thought my (now) boyfriend fancied me because he "favourited" virtually every tweet I sent to him.  He in fact was being lazy and couldn't be bothered to talk to me.  Oh well, how fortunate for me I misunderstood the multiple uses of this feature!

 


NOW SOME PRACTICAL THINGS FOR COMPLETE BEGINNERS

You're welcome to skip past these 17 points if you've been on Twitter for a while and go straight for the offer of a beer at the end! 

General vs @Tweets

1) There's a distinction between general tweets & tweets directed at a particular person (@tweets)

2) A general tweet is one you just type and that all your followers will see.  Anyone doing a search for any keyword in that tweet will also see it.

3) @tweets, by contrast, start off with the @ symbol plus the name right at the start of the message e.g.  "@HyperbolicGoat Have you eaten many table legs recently?"  This tweet would appear only in HyperbolicGoat's timeline, and would not show in the timeline of the rest of my followers.

4) The exception to 3 is where someone follows both me AND HyperbolicGoat. It enables that "mutual follower" to see the conversation happening between us and join in if s/he wishes (Note, see "Butting In, above".)

@Mentions

5) Sometimes you want to publicise an @tweet to someone and make sure all your followers see it.  You can do this my simply not putting the @ right at the start of the message. e.g. ".@HyperbolicGoat is a lovely person, follow him!"

6) Alternatively you could put the name anyway else in the tweet e.g. "I had a great drink this evening with @HyperbolicGoat and @Dancing_Piglet".

7) There are many ways to keep the @ away from the first position in the tweet - "@ or ,@ or .@ all work just as well.

8) To see if anyone has referred to you in a tweet like this, you have to go to the "@mentions" section of your timeline.

9) Similarly, if someone who you don't follow has interacted with you, the message will not appear in your timeline because you don't follow them.  Instead you need to go to the "@mentions" section to see it.

10) You cannot use the @ symbol followed by any word or it will appear in the @mentions of the person with that username.  If you write "I wanted to laugh @Oscar" - it would have popped up in the mentions of whichever random person has the name "@Oscar". What you actually should have written is "I wanted to laugh at Oscar" or even "I wanted to laugh @ Oscar" with a space in between.

Protected Accounts

11) You can protect your tweets so that only your followers can see them.  You may want to do this for any number of reasons, including for example if you're a teacher and don't want your pupils seeing your private persona.  It will also lead to less spam (annoying marketing people who randomly pick up on keywords you have used and provide you with links to websites).  However it makes it less likely you will pick up new followers, as people can't see what you're saying.

12) If your account is protected, you cannot be retweeted by use of the "retweet" button.  People still can retweet you though by copying and pasting your tweet with the letters "RT" at the start of the tweet.  They generally won't do so without having the decency to ask first.  Your account is protected for a reason after all.

13) If your account is protected and you reply to someone who is not following you, they cannot see your tweet.  Even experienced Twitter users frequently don't realise this.

14) If someone Google searches your username your tweets will not appear if you have protected them.  Only if you have allowed them to follow you, will the Google search throw up your timeline (sophisticated and quite impressive, eh?)

Direct Messages

15)  Twitter is inherently a public medium.  This is why you should be aware that anything you type, even in an @message is potentially viewable by anyone.  The only exception is if your account if protected - and even then your own approved followers can see the tweet, screen grab, and repost it if they so choose.

16) The exception is the direct message.  This is a way of having a completely private conversation between just two people.  You can only send a "DM" to someone who follows you and they can only reply if you follow them back.  Remember however that a libel passed by a DM still constitutes a libel even if just one person reads it.

17) The direct message is sometimes called the "Dark Room of Twitter" as this is where all the confidential, naughty stuff goes on.  Apparently. Ahem.  However: concerns have been raised that it is not quite as secure as you might think and it can be hacked.  Further, any photos you post may well be viewable in your general photo stream.  Therefore if you want to be really naughty and are worried about confidentiality, save it for email or texts which are inherently more secure.



RIGHT, this was meant to be a quick blog.  It's turned into something almost as long as a 19th century Russian novel.  Biers are on me if you made it this far!  If you've found it useful, do please share this post with people you know are new to Twitter.  It's a great medium and there are precious few practical "how to" guides in my experience.

Parents

At the end of August in 1997, I was on a cringe-worthy Californian self-development course in London.  (It was actually very good - but I'm half-English, and we don't do emotions and talking about them terribly well, so let's just call it that.)

Spilling my Guts

Anyway, during the course we did a unit on our parents.  It essentially said we owed everything to them: literally we wouldn't be on Earth if it weren't for them.  Of course our relationship with our parents, for most of us, also tends to be one of the most screwed up of them all.  I listened intently.  It all made good sense: yes, we had to tell them we love them - unconditionally - for who they were, not for who we wanted them to be.  Yadda, yadda.  (Editor's note: this *cannot* excuse their reading the Daily Mail - there must be some limits, obvs.)  Yup, I got it all.  Fine, next point?

Then up came the assignment.  Gosh, we actually had to go and call them and tell them that we loved them.  Eww - I mean, seriously?  Of course my parents knew I loved them.  It's part of the deal that everyone knows that, but most people don't say it, right?  I mean, c'mon.

Peter is ultimately a good boy, though, so off he trotted with - some apprehension -  to do the exercise.  Who should answer the phone - not Mutti, but my Father.  He immediately said "Do you want to speak to your Mother?"  I always did, let's face it: interactions with Dad were generally restricted to a "How are you? Fine".  He was an army man, for god's sake!

But I replied "No, Dad, I'd like to talk to you."  I proceeded to tell him over the space of 15 minutes what he meant to me.  I've no idea where it all came from.  I said that actually he was the one who encouraged me the most at school, not my mother.  He had bought me Lady Bird history books (Queen Victoria was my fave by the way: she rocked!).  He had taught me how to swim, how to tie my laces, how to read a clock.  He had given me £10 per O level and £100 per A level passed; and we weren't that well off.  I said that I thought he unfairly put himself down, and that I always related to him as being incredibly bright.  I wouldn't have got into Cambridge without his encouragement, or had the job I now did.  I went on and on.  I told him I loved him - straight out, just like that.

Fine, Noted

At the end of the call, Dad simply said "Fine, noted....  Your mother and I are off with the caravan at the weekend to the New Forest..."  I felt my blood pressure rising.  I'd just spilled me sodding guts (and I always wear nice shoes: messy :s ) and his reaction was "Fine, noted?"  Couldn't he show some emotion back for once and tell me he loved me or something similar?  Hadn't I just pressed the magic button to change and deepen our relationship forever?  FFS.

Then I stopped myself.  Hmm, wasn't there something about loving them unconditionally?  Not for how I wanted him to react or to be?  The penny dropped.  I tried to listen to what he was saying; I actually did listen and had a nice conversation about the caravan and about the dog.  It wasn't what I had wanted, but it was actually lovely.

In March 2000 I paid for both of my parents to come over Bermuda where I was living and working on a case.  We had the most fabulous time: it was perfect.  I could now afford to return a favour and show them a great time for once.  Mutti hadn't wanted to go up the lighthouse: my Father said "no come on, we'll never know if we'll be back."  2 weeks later Dad was out training for the London Marathon: running was what he lived for.  He had run 5 marathons in one year alone.  I was sitting in my office in Hamilton when I got the call from my brother Alan: Dad had a massive heart-attack and died before the ambulance arrived, aged 60. 

That Conversation

In the time that followed we obviously talked about things amongst the family.  I asked Mutti if Dad had ever mentioned the conversation we'd had.  She looked at me and said "I knew your father since 1963.  I saw him cry twice: once when Davy [our collie] died; and once when he came off that call with you."  Do you have any idea how precious that fact is to me?

I had told him I loved him all because of some ghastly American self-development course.  I would have left it unsaid in that terribly English way, and never have got the chance.  But I'd done it - and - I will have that knowledge with me forever.  I've since done the same with Mutti, and continue to do so.

Do something amazing tonight.  Don't just read this and think "Aww isn't that sweet" or alternatively "Oooh that Peter's a soft head".  Phone up your parents if you're lucky to have them.  Particularly if it's awkward and this is the type of thing you'd never do.  Tell them you love them and why.  Please don't put it off.

Dad running the Berlin Marathon, 1999

Color

On a simple evening stroll through our Skuggahverfi this amazing collaboration of colors made my day. I've been on a little late summer hiatus, but will continue bringing you more scenes from our pretty little city as we stretch into autumn. This, by the way, is my 596th post! Hard for me to believe...

A Fake Belief

Lord Credo (@lord_credo)  is well known to those interested in politics on Twitter.  He described himself as "a government Tory communications guy" on his profile; now he says he's a "former govt comms guy".  He has 4400 followers and is in the top 10 "House of Twits" favourite political tweeters currently.

In brief this is the picture of how he has portrayed of himself (note he did not say this to everyone, or all at once - he was too clever for that and it's what I have pieced together):

- He was David Cameron's personal advisor and representative
- He reported only and personally to David Cameron and the Chief Whip
- Only the Chief Whip and his "good friend" William Hague knew his identity online
- He was on the same level with Andy Coulson, was offered his job, but refused it
- He previously worked for the Canadian PM and was personally head-hunted to work for ours
- Somehow, however, he also fitted in working for the Archbishop of Canterbury in comms
- He had read theology, trained as a priest, worked as a policeman briefly in Ontario, then as a pilot, before going into politics/ communications. He suffers from MS.

Just to be clear, the "Lord" title has always been a joke - he and a couple of others took the title at the time of one of the Honours Lists.  Before that he was just "The_Credo".  I don't think anyone ever took the Lord title to be a real thing.

Credo resigned his job for David Cameron in May, but is currently on gardening leave.  This was because of a personal falling out, even though the Prime Minister has apparently called him and begged him to return to his job.  It coincides with the diagnosis of a brain tumour (more on this later).

Credo's "offline" name is Mike Paterson.  He has always taken pains to protect his identity, because he is so "high level".  I did hear him give this name, however, in my presence to officers of the Essex Constabulary in May 2011.

Emperor's New Clothes

I had huge doubts Credo could possibly be who he said he was quite early on.  Many of us did; how could anyone be tweeting as much as he did in a job so high level, and be so indiscreet about government goings on.  However, we met and he seemed genuine. Very likeable in fact.

Moreover I met him the presence of a BBC chap (who is real) and two people who work in the Commons (who are also real).  I saw him talking online to people like Sally Bercow (I was in Hampshire hotel lobby with him when her name flashed up on his mobile).  I'd been to drinks with him and the infamous undercover blogger and real life journalist Fleet Street Fox.  More recently he's been talking openly to Louise Mensch MP: people see this, they see his profile bio, and don't think any thing more than "he must be real".

Indeed, the Huffington Post ran an interview (click on link) with "Credo" on 3 August 2011 as one of top four "Tories who tweet anonymously".  In this he speaks with extreme self-assurance about his top position.  The journalists involved clearly did not bother to delve too much further into his actual identity.

Remember the Hans Christian Andersen Story? Everyone in the crowd looks on at the Emperor who is not wearing anything.  Because everyone thinks everyone else can see the lovely clothes, not a soul says a thing.  Credo didn't ever turn up in nice clothes though - he wore the same threadbare ill-fitting jacket every time I saw him, coming from "work" or from home, clutching a dirty worn out BBC bag.  But none of us was the little boy in the crowd who shouted out "he's naked!"

Abuse of Friendship

Credo weaseled his way into my group of friends.  He and his girlfriend spent the entire summer staying with various of them, moving from house to house, apparently because his house in Sussex had sold and a new purchase had fallen through.  The longest was 8 weeks with a lovely woman, from whom he "borrowed" money and didn't pay a penny in food contributions, towards utilities or the huge phone bill he ran up.  He also borrowed cash from another friend on Twitter.  It was a standing joke that Credo would come along to drinks and forget his wallet.  He has asked all of us to put him up at one time another; more recently there have been requests for money.

When he was "diagnosed" with cancer - a malignant brain tumour - we were all extremely concerned.  He announced it online: his follower count shot up.  Offers of support and help poured in.  He told us his wife, from whom he was estranged, had suddenly committed suicide in Sydney just before their divorce was finalised.  She was a medical doctor and knew which pills to take.  As a result of the divorce however, all his accounts were frozen.  The latest was that he was expecting a cheque for hundreds of thousands of pounds from the estate - but somehow it never arrived.  Credo's cancer fortunately disappeared amazingly rapidly; when I saw him I couldn't believe how well he looked.  It was almost as if he had never had it... 

I'd had a former Lib Dem friend who had constantly doubted Credo could be who he said he was.  He had worked at the House of Commons and rationally set out his doubts.  I simply refused to believe it.  I liked Mike and yes some of these things were a bit odd.  When he claimed to have been instrumental in bringing Andy Coulson down and presented him with damning evidence - well it was brushed off as Credo blowing his own trumpet.  The epic 48 hour drive he made to Scotland at Christmas just didn't seem real; the time he was in Amsterdam and crossing areas on foot faster than a gazelle (at around 18 stone, Mike is NO gazelle) didn't quite add up.  The sheer amount of drama and chaos going on in one person's life - from his mother having a stroke, then breast cancer, then a heart-by pass... through to the dead wife.  It just didn't seem plausible.  But my friends knew him and "proper" people were talking to him online.

Rumbled

Then he came up to my home in Suffolk last week. He was showing off about having picked up "1000 followers during the riots".  It seemed to all be going to his head.  I'd unfortunately seen this before (click on link: a fake QC, much less high profile).  Mike offered to invest £250,000 in my business project.  He failed to recognise a very well known Henry Mee portrait at a friend's house - its twin is hanging at Portcullis House - and seemed embarrassed.  He failed to answer an email about the investment.  He claimed his phone had been switched off for 24 hours (given the PM calls him night and day this seemed unlikely).  He made a big show of his having poured wine over his laptop - a reason he hadn't answered my email perhaps?  I'm not Miss Marple, but alarm bells were ringing and this made me want to talk to people.

So those of us who knew him started talking to one another.  It's not easy if you're wrong to be going out there and doubting every thing about a friend, to your mutual friends.  Through a contact, David Cameron's Deputy Chief of Staff confirmed no one had knowledge of a Michael Paterson who had ever worked for the Prime Minister.  I got in touch with the people I'd seen him with at pubs in Whitehall: no one had actually checked him out.  When he boasted he'd had "top level background checks" I asked the person who apparently had carried them out.  He hadn't.

I also spoke to @markstamps - a good friend on Twitter and one of our circle of friends.  Now the whole thing really came crashing down.  Whilst Mike was enjoying the free hospitality of another friend, he'd carelessly left his passport lying around.  His name wasn't Mike Paterson - it was in fact Michael Gordon Bracci.  A couple of photocopies were taken, just in case.  Why would he be lying about his name to us all? Mark had asked an official contact to do some checks.  Mark had been doing a lot of work building up a dossier without any of us knowing.  No one with those names had any form of House of Commons clearance.

Religious Right Alert

It doesn't take much to do some Internet searches.  Michael Gordon Bracci is the real name of another alias Credo has used: Mike Daley.  He appears on the "Religious Right Alert" website as a "notorious and self-pronounced 'shit disturber' on the Canadian Anglican Right".  He seems to be some relatively low-level character who sets up cyber squats and was pushing for the schism of the Anglican Church in North America over gay and women's rights through a body called the "Cranmer Foundation" (of which he was the sole director). He moved to London in 2009 and suffers from MS.

Mike is still married.  His wife is not a dead medical doctor in Sydney, but in fact teaches philosophy at an American university.  She is a former evangelical Christian, turned traditionalist.  From what I can see on line she appears to be very much alive.  She did grow up in the Black Forest, which he had mentioned a couple of times to me about his "late wife".  She talks in one Canadian magazine interview about their traditional marriage and how her husband Mike has moved to London for a job in PR, but that they make things work.  I've no idea if she knows about his now girlfriend and how that fits in exactly with this viewpoint.

Conclusions

Well, Credo is a fake.  He's a confidence trickster, he's pulled the wool over the eyes of many people and he's been left to do it by the actual Downing Street communications team.  Did no one there think to check out and stop someone so well known on Twitter in political circles, who claimed to be so high level?  Instead MPs were happily chatting to him in public.

He's taken hospitality and money from friends of mine.  According to his passport he has no residency or work permit to be in this country.  He has weaseled his way in to a group of people - including gays and lesbians - even though he is a traditionalist Christian and has worked to further Church homophobia.  He has spoken positively about people I know from the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement - but whom he must actually know from the bitter "other side of the fence".

He's currently - apparently - back in Canada, where his mother died unexpectedly just a few hours after his arrival.  His response to the hundreds of messages of sympathy and all the attention on Twitter was "wow, thanks everybody."  Michael Gordon Bracci been building up a totally false identity for himself and thriving off the attention he's been getting.  His motivation? Well in his own words "I struggle with self-esteem and depression and invent elaborate fantasies to cope with the depression and anxiety" [sent to me by IM by him at 16.49 after this was originally posted].

How do I feel? Angry, sick, embarrassed, violated, and furious on behalf of my friends he has exploited.  Police and Immigration should be involved here.  If I find out Mike has set his foot in this country again, they will be.

Pic c/o @Art_Li - the irony of Credo's name is not lost on me

20/8 Additional Information: Credo admitted in public on his profile, after this post was published, that he was a liar.  He then deleted the profile.  He has been in constant IM contact with me throughout today, threatening suicide at one moment if I did not remove this blog (only to ask 10 minutes later: "are you still there?"), through to begging for forgiveness, and then justifying his actions.  He's admitted that his wife is not dead and says he's in contact with her.  I'm simply screen saving everything, refusing to let him manipulate me in the way he wants, and warning him to steer clear of anyone in my circle of friends.

For anyone thinking "whatever" I want to stress this is not about a fake Twitter account - it's about a person who has used the medium to trick people in real life and caused massive upset.  Help he clearly needs, but my responsibility is to those I care about, which is why I published this.

21/8 Finally, according to his girfriend (and as tweeted by her) his mother is "very much alive" and she has spoken to her.  She has also tweeted that Michael conned her personally out of £15,000.

Scotland's healthcare

I just came back from the GP. The last time I visited the GP was in January. I worked in England for two months and piled up all my ailments because I was unwilling to pay 7.40pounds per prescription there. When I came back to Glasgow, I delayed going to the GP because I was reluctant to pay 3 pounds for prescription.  Today, the GP told me that everyone in Scotland gets free prescriptions starting March 2011. That was amazing news. My jaw dropped. Medications are FREE! It got me thinking about the recent amount of cough medicines I bought from Boots, I could have gotten it for free by seeing a GP here.... Hmm, I don't think everyone knew about the change in policy. From paying 3pounds to ZERO pounds. And we have the people in England fuming even more because they pay high tax and higher prescription charges... Very encouraging for people to see their GP more than a pharmacist.

What else is fantastic about Glasgow in August:
I have an awesome view from my room window!
The weather has been fantastic! Even better than rainy England..
Lastly, George Square and the surrounding is being transformed into Philly for two weeks because....
BRAD PITT is in Glasgow filming a movie less than 10mins from where I stay!!