I've only recently become a prolific writer; mostly through the necessities of my job and thus through lots of practice. I've always had difficulty writing -- but only until I found topics I care about or items of particular interest. This hasn't changed for me, I guess.

I am still doing book reviews (sortof). I am a prolific reader -- but lately the books I've read either were non-fiction and I didn't think of writing a review, or they already had one. (Perhaps I picked the book from someone else's book review!) It has (at the time of this writing) been nearly two months since I've succeeded in actually reading a new fiction book (see above note about new hobbies). I've just temporarily lost motovation for that sort of thing, having too much fun elsewhere I guess. (Perhaps now I'll go and write some non-fiction book reviews.)

Lately, I've started covering various books I've read. My goal is to let on enough of the plot so that if you've read the book, you'll know which one this is if you've forgotten, but not enough so that it'll ruin the fun in reading it, and perhaps it'll help you decide if you want to read it too. Note that my reviews cover only content, not quality. If I hate the book, I'll say so, but if it's slightly poorly written, I may not notice. If it is really really poorly written I probably just won't finish it, and you'll not get a review of it from me. :)

I've recently considered collecting book reviews and/or book recommendations somewhere. Let me know if you'd like to see a list.

do the Downvote Challenge!

If you (sort of) agree with my writeup, better means:

• it covers all the facts I covered in a more understandable way
• it is as organized or more organized
• it might include things I left out
• it is better spelled (8-P)

• your writeup includes everything in mine that we mutually agree on, even if it opposes your views in general
• you include verifyable hard facts in your writeup that specifically contradict points in mine that you disagree with
• your writeup is well written enough and convincing enough to convince me that I'm wrong and you are right

If you succeed at the downvote challenge in all relevant ways listed above, I will ask for my writeup to be nuked.

The following wu's of mine have been challenged (unsuccessfully so far):

War On Some Drugs

This writeup has been accused of being wrong and written like a BBS. The first point I disagree with, as I've done my research, and nobody has yet actually noded anything factual and contradictory (it's all unsubstantiated (and frequenly just wrong) opinion, last I checked). As to the second point -- I aggree, and some day I'll rewrite that writeup.

I can Divide by zero

Two separate people have challenged me on this one. One of them, after much discussion, reluctantly agreed with my motives. The other says he'll do a better job some day. All three of us (including me) think that this entire node is wrong, and my writeup isn't entirely right either. However, my intent is to attempt to fill a void of understanding about the topic, and while my wu might not be entirely correct, it is a lot more correct than the other writeups there, and there are about 40 other similarly misleading nodes. Someone needs to explain this better. A few other relevant nodes (many also need help) include: limit Lim I can divide by zero 1=2 divide by zero 0/0 dividing by zero division by zero makes the world blow up division by zero error 1/infinity 0! ; Nodes that should be mentioned include: infinitesimal sketching asymptotes simpson's rule l'Hospital's Rule converge integration derivative sigma notation indeterminate undefined the zero/infinity paradox infinity/infinity infinity is not a number slope dy/dx

If you succeed, I will certainly upvote your writeup, even if I still disagree with it.

Make E2 a better place, and not just by downvoting!