I think it's time to rethink my strategy really. I've been to some interesting sites so far but I get the feeling I'm going to end up going round in circles booleanly. The trouble is that most of the rabbit sites inevitably use the same words (and I know that anyone out there could have told me so - but I wanted to try it out). Anyhoo, once again we come up against the wicked problem of Boolean digitality versus human analog-ity: the fact is that I can't - or won't - be happy with such rigidity as offered by the bunny limits, and I'm growing bored. And to solve the problem, bizarrely I'm going to make my strategy MORE rigid.
So...instead of using the bunny related words to direct my travels, I will now simply choose the first two or three words offered on the site after the page title and see where that takes me. I am sure I will travel with Boole well beyond the bounds of bunny worlds. See ya.
Thursday 29 July 2010
Monday 26 July 2010
Domestic AND rabbit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_rabbit A clear example of all that's wrong with using Wiki as a source. Initially it seems pretty sound. But problems abound: "Animal rights activists have opposed animal experimentation for non-medical purposes" it maintains. This implies that AR activists don't oppose other kinds of experiment -but they very definitely do. A later contradiction of this statement is itself queried in the article There is also a very clear bias towards experimentation, no mention of how many rabbits are used, for instance, just how useful they are. Again: "Show rabbits is an increasingly popular wholesome activity for individuals and families. Showing rabbits helps to improve the vigor and physical characteristics of each breed through competitive selection". This is quite clearly just the opinion of the writer, but is presented as some kind of 'fact' about rabbits. There are many who would dispute both the wholesomeness of showing rabbits just for entertainment of the shower, and selective breeding which can result in horrendous deformation of rabbit characteristics and consequent medical problems for their bearer.
That's a bit of a rant for today. However, I did come across a new truth about rabbits - people use them for show-jumping! Bizarre and sad.
That's a bit of a rant for today. However, I did come across a new truth about rabbits - people use them for show-jumping! Bizarre and sad.
Friday 23 July 2010
Diet AND rabbit NOT pellets
The very, very, very strange thing about this result http://www.hopperhome.com/rabbit_food.htm is the use of Mr Potato Head bits and bobs for the pictures. It's a funny and frankly, a bit freaky too.
This is one of many semi-amatuer rabbit sites that offers links, a blog and various items of interest and information about rabbits as well as a whole big dollop of personal experience. It's a good exemplar, I think, of that halfway house the Net offers between professional knowledge and vernacular. If you warp the Laswellian Two-Step Flow model and apply it here, you have not just one opinion leader to understand, filter and disseminate media messages (in this case about bunnies) but a vast mesh of similarly informed opinion leaders.
There are two questions (at least) here. First, where is the info is coming from? While individual experiences obviously vary in many cases, it's perfectly possible to imagine that the same "official" information/knowledge circulates like an endless game of Chinese Whispers, passed on from one semi-official site to another and mixed with a liberal dash of on-the-ground experience. On the other hand, there are often contradictions. This sets up the next question then: how is one to decide which of the many sites to take as reliable? For academic purposes, it's fairly easy to decide what site to use, but when looking after animals (or for that matter mending the car) it's not. You want a bit of personal experience in there, certainly - one likes to think that the site has been put together by an experienced bunny keeper. But what about the situation where (as with this site) where one type of food is recommended but on another it's claimed to be dangerous? I call this the parsnip-lettuce problem.
Anyhow, it's a bit of a fun site with some nice pics, although a little thin on textual design . For this search I took Dave's advice and altered the order of things so that rabbit wasn't first. My next search will be Domesticated AND Rabbit
This is one of many semi-amatuer rabbit sites that offers links, a blog and various items of interest and information about rabbits as well as a whole big dollop of personal experience. It's a good exemplar, I think, of that halfway house the Net offers between professional knowledge and vernacular. If you warp the Laswellian Two-Step Flow model and apply it here, you have not just one opinion leader to understand, filter and disseminate media messages (in this case about bunnies) but a vast mesh of similarly informed opinion leaders.
There are two questions (at least) here. First, where is the info is coming from? While individual experiences obviously vary in many cases, it's perfectly possible to imagine that the same "official" information/knowledge circulates like an endless game of Chinese Whispers, passed on from one semi-official site to another and mixed with a liberal dash of on-the-ground experience. On the other hand, there are often contradictions. This sets up the next question then: how is one to decide which of the many sites to take as reliable? For academic purposes, it's fairly easy to decide what site to use, but when looking after animals (or for that matter mending the car) it's not. You want a bit of personal experience in there, certainly - one likes to think that the site has been put together by an experienced bunny keeper. But what about the situation where (as with this site) where one type of food is recommended but on another it's claimed to be dangerous? I call this the parsnip-lettuce problem.
Anyhow, it's a bit of a fun site with some nice pics, although a little thin on textual design . For this search I took Dave's advice and altered the order of things so that rabbit wasn't first. My next search will be Domesticated AND Rabbit
Friday 9 July 2010
Rabbit AND food NOT farm
Today's hop brings me here http://www.rabbit.org/faq/sections/diet.html the House Rabbit Society's website. A really upbeat bounce-back from that nasty rabbit farm. A person shouln't be fooled by the basic look of this site - the HRS is a fantastic resource for anyone who has rabbits, whether 'house' or otherwise. This raises an issue in my mind about the importance (or otherwise) of how a website is presented. HRS is a place that is visited by many keen rabbit owners and casual visitors I guess, and they haven't really bothered with bells and whistles. And it's easy to use. The problem with it is that you get lost in it, because of all the interesting stuff on there (if you like bunnies of course). I just accidentally came across a guide for bonding bunnies and lost half an hour there. That's the 'net for you.
Anyhoo, the whole idea of a House Rabbit used to seem a bit bizarre to me. Rabbits are, after all, designed to live outside. How do you replicate that in a house? How do you replicate burrowing for instance? The HRS knows. Check it out. Next search: Rabbit OR diet NOT pellets
Anyhoo, the whole idea of a House Rabbit used to seem a bit bizarre to me. Rabbits are, after all, designed to live outside. How do you replicate that in a house? How do you replicate burrowing for instance? The HRS knows. Check it out. Next search: Rabbit OR diet NOT pellets
Wednesday 7 July 2010
Rabbits OR types
Today's search came up with two sites I had already visited first, so I employed the Fibonacci rule and went for number 3 (which logically I would have done anyway). Oh but this site is a bit of a challenge http://vimeo.com/groups/7080/videos/9836667 It's an independent documentary film channel and this is a video of a rabbit breeding/farming facility providing rabbits for restaurants.
Oh dear. If you like animals at all this will be really upsetting. Hundreds of rabbits kept in tiny cages. No hay, just wire under their feet. Only room to turn round. Tragic and appalling. But the documentarist seems to think it's fine. I haven't really got much to say but people SHOULD watch this - we should all know where our food comes from.
Oh dear. If you like animals at all this will be really upsetting. Hundreds of rabbits kept in tiny cages. No hay, just wire under their feet. Only room to turn round. Tragic and appalling. But the documentarist seems to think it's fine. I haven't really got much to say but people SHOULD watch this - we should all know where our food comes from.
Tuesday 6 July 2010
Rabbits NOT Leporidae
This search took me to one of those really boring/annoying websites
http://www.petwebsite.com/rabbits.asp which serve as umbrellas for lots of topics. Annoying because when you really want info quickly it adds another few clicks to the searching. Boring because there are so many links that it's confusing and tiring having to bother. On the good side, some of those links are useful - they go to rabbit welfare sites and places where you can get really solid info. On the not-so-good, lots of the links are to rabbits for sale. I don't think you should be able to sell animals over the 'net. So there. Lots of links to rabbit products for sale too.
It's well named: Pet Website. Does what it says on the tin. This kind of "shop" did not used to exist in the high street: the local pet shop sold pets, petfood and pet products. Occasionally put ads in the window. But the major stores now do do the things that the websites do. They have links with welfare groups. They advertise insurance company prodcuts and services. They sell second-hand pets. They have books and training days too. I wonder if it is because they have to compete with the web, or with each other?
Difficult to ascertain what search to use as the term 'rabbit' is repeated endlessly before you get to anything else. New rule then: a word will only appear once in each search - I obviously can't using Rabbit AND Rabbit. It looks like it's going to be the words "types" and "rabbits"
http://www.petwebsite.com/rabbits.asp which serve as umbrellas for lots of topics. Annoying because when you really want info quickly it adds another few clicks to the searching. Boring because there are so many links that it's confusing and tiring having to bother. On the good side, some of those links are useful - they go to rabbit welfare sites and places where you can get really solid info. On the not-so-good, lots of the links are to rabbits for sale. I don't think you should be able to sell animals over the 'net. So there. Lots of links to rabbit products for sale too.
It's well named: Pet Website. Does what it says on the tin. This kind of "shop" did not used to exist in the high street: the local pet shop sold pets, petfood and pet products. Occasionally put ads in the window. But the major stores now do do the things that the websites do. They have links with welfare groups. They advertise insurance company prodcuts and services. They sell second-hand pets. They have books and training days too. I wonder if it is because they have to compete with the web, or with each other?
Difficult to ascertain what search to use as the term 'rabbit' is repeated endlessly before you get to anything else. New rule then: a word will only appear once in each search - I obviously can't using Rabbit AND Rabbit. It looks like it's going to be the words "types" and "rabbits"
Monday 5 July 2010
First Hop: rabbit AND bunny
Oh dear! Already I've run into trouble as the first site offered was this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit . I can see that Wiki is going to be a bit of a pain in the scut and if it begins to turn up too often as first choice I'll have to rethink the strategy. Never mind that at the moment - what about the site? This Wiki isn't a bad piece of work all told. It does have a few errors (e.g. that bunnies get along with guinea pigs) but it is quite thorough - enough for year 7 project on rabbits, say.
What I like about this Wiki is that it deals with the whole creature. So here we have the details of how it eats, breeds and lives alongside myths and legends, its use as clothing, and fictional bunnies, with loads of follow-up links. This is an important issue: if you compare to, for example, TV wildlife programmes, in these there is far too much spectacle and natural history info which rarely moves beyond what a creature eats, what eats it, how it mates, what it fights, and where it lives. Go to the related website and you get much of the same, or "how it was filmed"; it's a very narrow view.
Having said that, this Rabbit Wiki is structured very much around the "scientific gaze". There's no feeling that we are talking about a living bouncy hoppy creature here. The categories are science-discourse-based: "location and habitat", "characteristics and anatomy", despite the break-out into other info areas. One thing is very absent here though, considering the science-focus - there's nothing about the use of the rabbit as a scientific tool: a big, big gap in the Wiki.
Not counting the titles and redirects, the next terms will be rabbits and Leporidae, separated this time by the Boolean term NOT.
What I like about this Wiki is that it deals with the whole creature. So here we have the details of how it eats, breeds and lives alongside myths and legends, its use as clothing, and fictional bunnies, with loads of follow-up links. This is an important issue: if you compare to, for example, TV wildlife programmes, in these there is far too much spectacle and natural history info which rarely moves beyond what a creature eats, what eats it, how it mates, what it fights, and where it lives. Go to the related website and you get much of the same, or "how it was filmed"; it's a very narrow view.
Having said that, this Rabbit Wiki is structured very much around the "scientific gaze". There's no feeling that we are talking about a living bouncy hoppy creature here. The categories are science-discourse-based: "location and habitat", "characteristics and anatomy", despite the break-out into other info areas. One thing is very absent here though, considering the science-focus - there's nothing about the use of the rabbit as a scientific tool: a big, big gap in the Wiki.
Not counting the titles and redirects, the next terms will be rabbits and Leporidae, separated this time by the Boolean term NOT.
Boolean Bunny challenge
As part of Boolefest at the University of Lincoln I have set myself the challenge of wandering the 'net using three parameters. The first is that I use Boolean search terms AND, OR, and NOT and combinations of these in rotation. The second is that I use only rabbit-related words. Thus, I will initiate my wanderings with Rabbit AND Bunny. I'll visit the first site that Google offers me, and, having enjoyed its offerings and blogged about it a bit, I will choose from that site the first two rabbit-related terms therein and use these for my next search.
If during my searches, the first site that Google offers is one I have already visited, I will bring in the third parameter, which is the Fibonacci sequence: 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55 etc (I will obviously need to ignore the first few numbers of the sequence).
Why am I doing this? Because I want to! Also because it involves three of my favourite things: rabbits, numbers, and serendipity. And also because it's that apprent randomness overlying a very strong structure that makes bunnies so fascinating. That's Bunny Logic for you.
If during my searches, the first site that Google offers is one I have already visited, I will bring in the third parameter, which is the Fibonacci sequence: 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55 etc (I will obviously need to ignore the first few numbers of the sequence).
Why am I doing this? Because I want to! Also because it involves three of my favourite things: rabbits, numbers, and serendipity. And also because it's that apprent randomness overlying a very strong structure that makes bunnies so fascinating. That's Bunny Logic for you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)