Navel Gazing Meta Stuff+

I'm continually surprised at who is reading the blog, why they're reading, and what they get out of it. I'll therefore start this post out by explaining something that many of y'all already know:

The "Meta" in the post title indicates that I will be blogging about blogging. If I were to be blogging about blogging about blogging (as I guess I actually am doing at the moment), that would be meta-meta-blogging. For anyone who might quibble about redundancy, "Navel-Gazing" actually covers conceptually similar turf, but creates more specificity and connotes a particular (deprecating) connotation.

Okay. First observation: I did a post with "Stripper" in the title. That post spent all of yesterday as the most clicked upon headline in the national LeftyBlogs network of local blogs. That is the first time (that I'm aware of anyway) since my voting story that I've made the top 5. Redhorse once had a similar cynicism-inducing experience, when a piece he did about Dennis Kucinich garnering LeftyBlogs clicks rocketed up the LeftyBlogs chart. It won't be long before a site-traffic addict posts a story headlined: "Exotic Dancer Claims Evidence of Diebold Scheme to Steal Votes from Kucinich."

Next: I heard a rumor last week concerning someone I've written about. I was told it was strictly confidential and not widely known. Be that as it may, I got multiple hits last week from people who were doing Google Searches on the subject of said rumor. So, I'm saying two things right now: A) word seems to be spreading, obviously, so someone has been either successful or unsuccesful there, and B) Watching a rumor spread via web analytics is fascinating.

Also, I've finally started to get some evidence that some of my readers are, in fact, fellow Bexley residents. This is good, because I like to write about Bexley stories. In the most recent issue of ThisWeek Bexley, the most eye-catching story is about how Bexley's prom required submission to a Breathalyzer test before admission was granted. Students were warned on the day of the Prom, at lunchtime, about the Breathalyzer requirement. This was at least partly inspired by the situation at UA's Prom, where 125 kids were kicked out of their Prom due to evidence of alcohol use.

What's actually the better story to connect this to, though, is the release of the 2006 PPAAUS report (h/t Q.B.) on student behavior among Bexley Middle and High School students. People tend to glaze over when presented with numbers, but let me throw these out there: 48% of Juniors and Seniors reported using alcohol at parties. Another 31% reported consuming alcohol at some time in some other context. Given that Prom Night is apparently the context in which high-school drinking is most socially expected, it's not unreasonable to guess that approximately two hundred of the 320 Bexley prom-goers (62.5%) would have consumed alcohol that night without the increased prevention strategies. Of course, post-prom drinking most likely went on as planned. Anyway, there were apparently complaints about violations of civil liberties and all of that. Um, no. There was no requirement to attend the prom, and both the existence and methodology of the search were announced with enough forewarning to allow students to modify either their drinking or attendance. The process was applied to all students. The constitution protects against unreasonable search and seizure. Once again, as someone who often gets in heated arguments supporting the ACLU's unpopular position on cases, I still have to say that this is one of the more reasonable search policies I've heard of. Which is, perhaps, part of why Bexley students respect their teachers at much higher rates than Franklin County as a whole.

Which, in turn, is why I don't grumble about things like having a deadline to fix the awful paint job that was done on our garage before we moved in. I hope y'all have a better excuse to enjoy your weekend outside.