EverythingLubbock, KLBK, and KAMC delivers local news, weather and sports for Lubbock and surrounding communities. All content is formatted to fit your mobile screen. Here is some of the great content we have to offer: -Breaking News Alerts, Local Top Stories and Headlines -Weather and Local Animated Radar -Video. Jul 31, 2008 An Online Tagalog - English Dictionary Learn Tagalog or Filipino Language for free.

December 2008 - Bondage Video Discussion Forum Archive December 2008 Name: Billy Pilgram For you H.O.M. I have an untested theory.

In a GIMP posting, Sgt Major noted: 'I can tell you Renee Baker's name in real life was Debbie and I think he (Blakemore) called Georgia Van Helsing Dotty.' In 1982-1983, Dottie Van Dryk appeared as a model in Harmony Concepts' 'Bondage Parade' #7 and #8 along with Pia Sands (Michelle Bauer) who later worked with HOM's Barbara Bauer. There's an obvious overlap between Harmony models and HOM folks. Georgia Van Helsing starts appearing in 1984.

I've not seen the mags to make a comparison. Wednesday, December 3rd 2008 - 07:08:30 PM Name: A Canadian Ironman: I checked the trailers for those movies and I didn't see any evidence of bamboo beatings. If there is any hope, it could be in JBD-078 -- the woman is tied to a bamboo pole and is being beaten, but in the closeup scene in the trailer you can't see what she is being beaten with. That would look like the only movie where there might be hope -- I didn't see anything in the others.

Wednesday, December 3rd 2008 - 07:47:49 PM Name: Scribbler Brutus: I don't know if Red's still around. I just know of the site and that page listing all those HOM mags for sale. Not bought any from him myself. As his sites still up, I would hope he or someone's running it. Wednesday, December 3rd 2008 - 09:42:45 PM Name: fred1738 E-mail address: Brutus 'What's more boring for me is when the victim gets into it and starts yelling 'Harder! I know there's legal ramifications involved, but those scenes are one of the reasons why I can't get into many of the sites nowadays featuring penetration.'

So true, Those are asinine. The whole point of making the video was to create a seemingly non consensual rape scene. I can understand why people wish to cover their ass. But such protection should be isolated to interviews before and after the scene.

After all, it's the well acted struggle from the victim that makes these scenes work. I wonder if these sites realize how many perspective subscribers they are losing because of this. Wednesday, December 3rd 2008 - 11:41:29 PM Name: jhlipton E-mail address: stumbled across a mainstream that appears to be 'interrogation' oriented at the above link - regrettably, all I know is what appears in the trailer - no nudity can be seen but the concept appears quite nice. The synopsis mentions 'sexual humiliation', so there is hope! She looks like a hottie, and the scenes look intense.

Plus, it might be available from NetFlix, so there would be little cost in checking it out. Thursday, December 4th 2008 - 12:36:22 AM Name: Sloth E-mail address: Mornin All Brutus and Scribbler - years ago I did some business with Red over at the realm - wildly inconsistent and when my last order hadn't been sent after four months I sent a nasty-gram and got the bucks back - and I got the same story on the illness with surgery and recovery - I had others tell me he suffers grave illness when it's convenient - but then he did send the money back so he's no crook, just leisurely about doing business - and he does have a considerable inventory at reasonable prices. Billy Pilgrim - your untested theory is quite probably correct - so many crossover companies, so many stage names - hell, Michelle Bauer alone had at least five so why not Georgia and Renee and all the others. Jhlipton - I may take a chance and pull the trigger on this one - little indie with torture and sexual humiliation so what the hell - at the very least maybe some good compilation material - besides, with Lt.

Uhuru in it we may get a special guest appearance by William Shatner:). Got my latest VM order in and will watch 'Cut' accompanied by a couple martinis - let you know what I think on this one.

Stay Well All Thursday, December 4th 2008 - 07:34:58 AM Name: Brutus A Canadian: I've seen only three of VM's new selection, so all trailers would be welcome whenever YouTied is up again. However, I am particularly interested in JB-66 because of Ralphus's. Does the trailer show any of the exploding condom scene?

BTW, the trailer for JB-073 is pretty good. It was the reason I bought the movie (albeit with some later ). Sloth wrote: I had others tell me [Red] suffers grave illness when it's convenient. Strange way of doing business. Btu Hr To Watts Converter Rowing.

But he would be a good source on confirming the Georgia/Dottie theory and other magazine-related mysteries. Thursday, December 4th 2008 - 03:33:59 PM Name: A Canadian Homepage URL: Brutus: The answer to your question about the exploding condom in the JBD-066 trailer is a wishy-washy yes, it's sorta there. You'll understand what I mean when I post the trailer -- safe to say, I wouldn't have known that was what was going on if I hadn't read your question. I will post the trailers for all of the Attackers JBD classics that Video Mayhem is selling this month, with two exceptions. I won't post the trailer for JBD-077 (unless you really want to see it) as there are plenty of clips from that film already on YouTied.

If you want to find them quickly when YouTied returns, do a search for 'anjyu', the star of the film. Ftb Unleashed Map Download there. I also won't be posting the trailer for JBD-075.

I'm not being difficult -- the reason I won't post that one is that I already posted it about two weeks ago. I'll link to the JBD-075 trailer once YouTied is back. Thursday, December 4th 2008 - 05:31:11 PM Name: JoeX Re Red's Realm, I ordered from him once and after a long, long wait I eventually got a package, only to find out that he had messed up my order. Emails were bounced or ignored and I gave up. So I don't recommend him unless he has something you have to have and can't get anywhere else, in which case you can send him some money and hope for the best. As Brutus says, 'strange way to do business'. Joe X Thursday, December 4th 2008 - 07:01:07 PM Name: Ralphus E-mail address: Homepage URL: Just got an e-mail from MasterDetective.

Apparently I was correct in my assumption that this was a bandwidth exceeded issue. He said he hopes to have the site back up in the next few days.

Funny thing is, our hits always seem to skyrocket here on the GIMP whenever YouTied goes down. I keep track. We were higher than normal yesterday and way, way higher than that tonight. It's like people are coming back over here to get their perv fix when they can't look at the videos on YouTied. Or maybe they check in here to see why YouTied went down. At any rate, the two sites definitely seem to go hand in hand with a lot of the same people visiting both.

---------------- Brutus: You know, I had nearly forgotten I had written up a review for. That's really an excellent movie and one I strongly recommend. Great that some of these older Attackers are finally getting released on DVD, since from JB-60 on is when they started to get really good. A couple other very good titles are missing, though: JB-68 (the exploding ballgag movie) and JB-72 are ones that Larry said were unavailable. And probably the best of the lot, JB-79, isn't in this latest batch but is apparently coming soon.

That was the film I picked as my Best Movie of 2005 when Canadian and I did our year-end retrospectives. Other new ones I would recommend from this classic list are (a rare all-girl Attackers video that actually works.crammed full of torture) and featuring Mr. Cool Shades and his sadistic midget buddy tormenting a big busted cutie. I reviewed that one, too, check out my Homepage URL. Both of these would be hard to pass up at only 12 bucks each. Thursday, December 4th 2008 - 08:25:08 PM Name: Scribbler It's not likely that Harmony bondage model Dottie Van Dryk modeled using her real name. Tis in the high 90% chance that it's an alias and her real name is something else.

I don't know of very many bondage models who used their real names when bondage modeling. Well, actually I just know Betty Page. There probably are others over the years, but very few.

So if Georgia's real name is Dotty, then the chances of her doing bondage modeling as Dottie is really low. Chances go up if her real name isn't Dotty!

Although studying is considered a legitimate scientific nowadays, it is still a very young one. In the early 1970s, a psychologist named J. Guilford was one of the first academic researchers who dared to conduct a study of creativity. One of Guilford’s most famous studies was the nine-dot puzzle. He challenged research subjects to connect all nine dots using just four straight lines without lifting their pencils from the page. Today many people are familiar with this puzzle and its solution. In the 1970s, however, very few were even aware of its existence, even though it had been around for almost a century.

If you have tried solving this puzzle, you can confirm that your first attempts usually involve sketching lines inside the imaginary square. The correct solution, however, requires you to draw lines that extend beyond the area defined by the dots. At the first stages, all the participants in Guilford’s original study censored their own thinking by limiting the possible solutions to those within the imaginary square (even those who eventually solved the puzzle). Even though they weren’t instructed to restrain themselves from considering such a solution, they were unable to “see” the white space beyond the square’s boundaries. Only 20 percent managed to break out of the illusory confinement and continue their lines in the white space surrounding the dots. The symmetry, the beautiful simplicity of the solution, and the fact that 80 percent of the participants were effectively blinded by the boundaries of the square led Guilford and the readers of his books to leap to the sweeping conclusion that creativity requires you to go outside the box. The idea went viral (via 1970s-era media and word of mouth, of course).

Overnight, it seemed that creativity gurus everywhere were teaching managers how to think outside the box. Consultants in the 1970s and 1980s even used this puzzle when making sales pitches to prospective clients.

Because the solution is, in hindsight, deceptively simple, clients tended to admit they should have thought of it themselves. Because they hadn’t, they were obviously not as creative or smart as they had previously thought, and needed to call in creative experts. Or so their consultants would have them believe.

The nine-dot puzzle and the phrase “thinking outside the box” became metaphors for creativity and spread like wildfire in, management, psychology, the creative arts, engineering, and personal improvement circles. There seemed to be no end to the insights that could be offered under the banner of thinking outside the box. Speakers, trainers, training program developers, organizational consultants, and university professors all had much to say about the vast benefits of outside-the-box thinking. It was an appealing and apparently convincing message.

Indeed, the concept enjoyed such strong popularity and intuitive appeal that no one bothered to check the facts. No one, that is, before two different research —Clarke Burnham with Kenneth Davis, and Joseph Alba with Robert Weisberg—ran another experiment using the same puzzle but a different research procedure. Both teams followed the same protocol of dividing participants into two groups. The first group was given the same instructions as the participants in Guilford’s experiment.

The second group was told that the solution required the lines to be drawn outside the imaginary box bordering the dot array. In other words, the “trick” was revealed in advance. Would you like to guess the percentage of the participants in the second group who solved the puzzle correctly? Most people assume that 60 percent to 90 percent of the group given the clue would solve the puzzle easily. In fact, only a meager 25 percent did.

What’s more, in statistical terms, this 5 percent improvement over the subjects of Guilford’s original study is insignificant. In other words, the difference could easily be due to what statisticians call sampling error. Let’s look a little more closely at these surprising results. Solving this problem requires people to literally think outside the box.

Yet participants’ performance was not improved even when they were given specific instructions to do so. That is, direct and explicit instructions to think outside the box did not help. That this advice is useless when actually trying to solve a problem involving a real box should effectively have killed off the much widely disseminated—and therefore, much more dangerous—metaphor that out-of-the-box thinking spurs creativity. After all, with one simple yet brilliant experiment, researchers had proven that the conceptual link between thinking outside the box and creativity was a myth. Of course, in real life you won’t find boxes.

But you will find numerous situations where a creative breakthrough is staring you in the face. They are much more common than you probably think. *From Copyright 2014 Drew Boyd. There are many theories of creativity. What the latest experiment proves is not that creativity lacks any association to thinking outside-the-box, but that such is not conditioned by acquired knowledge, i.e., environmental concerns. For example, there have been some theories such as those of Schopenhauer (see his remarks about Genius) and Freud (see his remarks about Sublimation) that propose creativity is something more like a capacity provided by nature rather than one acquired or learned from the environment.

Rather than disproving the myth, in other words, the experiment might instead offer evidence that creativity is an ability that one is born with, or born lacking, hence why information from the environment didn't impact the results at all. It's an interesting experiment, but the author's conclusion cannot possibly follow from the results of it. I conduct soft skills training and outbound training for Corporates and individuals.

To enhance creativity we motivate the participants to approach the problems from variety of vantage points. Even repeatedly checking the boundary conditions we are able to come up with variety of ways of solving the problem. This is akin to checking the walls of the box. Looking inside the box for additional information, additional resources also helps. Looking at the box from bird's eye view triggers some different creative solutions. Let us not get tied down to the mechanics but free ourselves to find the solution.

I will give an example. You are playing football with family and friends at a distant ground and someone gets bruised badly. No first aid kit is available. Your priority is to get the person to a hospital ( at a distance of 2 hours ). The wound is bleeding and needs to be kept clean and bacteria free till the person reaches the hospital. What will you do? Think of a solution.

It is quite close to you. With all due respect, Professor Boyd, your argument is not at all compelling. It seems that you are taking the 'thinking outside the box' (TOTB) metaphor much more literally than it is intended (or, at least, as I and may others infer).

Let me point out a few false and/or negligent statements that you make: 1. To refer to TOTB as 'dangerous' is naive, at best.

I, personally, have seen the positive, tranformative effects of not only the 9-dots exercise, but also the occasional use of the term to remind individuals after-the-fact about the value of thinking differently. The experiment you refer to doesn't even come close to proving what you suggest that it does. To use the term 'proving' in an argument like this is laughable. In real life, you absolutely WILL find boxes.that is, if you understand what the term 'box' refers to. Here, the term is not literal; rather, it refers to a mindset, a perspective, a belief, or an assumption.

It is precisely how the human mind works. We all think in boxes all the time. The 'sin,' if you will, is not in thinking inside of a box.but the neglect to readily switch from one box to another, nimbly (see Alan Iny's new book, 'Thinking in New Boxes'). A different -- and very healthy, positive, and productive -- way to think about TOTB is to understand that it merely represents an insight that can remind an individual to consciously become aware of limiting assumptions. And, upon such awareness, to open ones mind and imagination to actively explore new possibilities beyond the obvious or initial answer.

If you don't regard this as valid contribution to creativity, then I suggest you consider spending a bit more time outside of that 'box' that you've presented here. I couldn't have said it any better.

TOTB is a beautiful skill to have. We are born into multiple boxes that are created upon social agreements (e.g. Illustrated by the hermeneutic circle) but the ones who dare to think outside of what is considered as social or scientific correct (all the boxes together) are the minds whom are absolute free and open towards new moralities, paradigms, innovations and creativity in general. Saying that TOTB is a negative thing is a very conservative statement and someone who has such a belief is scared of change, scared of diversity and scared of anything that is abstract and out of order. I'm all about TOTB and the best way to TOTB is to fully understand the box in the first place and why some people are scared of TOTB hence also lacking the ability to do so. Fold the paper so all the dots ovelap.

Use four lines to connect four dots. Hold the folded paper up to the light.all dots connected; Thinking outside The Box. For that matter, you could fold the paper until all the dots overlapped and you would not need to waste any pencil lead; Thinking outside The Box. Use a very wide pencil lead or charcoal block for that matter, connect all the dots in one fell swoop; Thinking outside The Box. Forego a pencil altogether and use a bucket of paint to create a huge blot over all the dots; Thinking outside The Box. Question the dots and why they need to be connected in the first place; Thinking outside The Box. Erase the dots; they are a distraction to Thinking outside The Box.

Create your own dots and lines in any fashion you desire; Thinking outside The Box. People that say, it's a misguided idea,, do not know how to think outside the box, I can look /listen/ at anything an tell you how to fix it. I play chess with my pc, an beat it all the time, and the reasoning is I do not think logically, like the pc does. It has a set of rules that it was programed with an you were in college, I do not play by the rules, I can play without the queen.Also when you go the a school that teaches how to think about something, that is all you know how to do.I have had engineers come to my deck, hand me a set of blueprints, because that was the way they were taught.

They are never taught to look at it, in there mind to see it working. What I do is show them how wrong they are, an ask them what tool in the world can cut a square hole inside the middle of two long tubes. They can not think outside the box, that they were taught to do. If was going to tell you about an airplane the TR-3B, it travels a little bit under light speed, an it uses nuclear fusion, which turns into plasma an powers the craft, that was built outside the box. An if you do not believe me type it into your search engine, you can also look it up at the library of congress under new patients. You my brother, do not have the inkling of understanding to think outside the box. That's why you are a psychologist an nothing more.