[COM] A Failure of Initiative (Hurricane Katrina Report) -tg

Post by **TriciaG** » January 10th, 2015, 6:59 am

Thanks again, Maria!

Post by **TriciaG** » January 10th, 2015, 3:07 pm

PL OK on section 41.

commonsparrow3 · Post by **commonsparrow3** » January 12th, 2015, 9:55 pm

Thanks, Tricia!

Here's Section 42 -- (Medical Care, part 3) -- (length 26:16)

https://librivox.org/uploads/triciag/failureofinitiative_42_ushor_128kb.mp3

By the way -- Do you hear the sound of me slapping myself on the forehead and groaning, "Duhhh!" Can you believe that it has taken me so long to finally figure out that "ushor" is not the name of the person who wrote the report, but an acronym for US House of Representatives?! Good grief, am I ever slow on the uptake!

Post by **TriciaG** » January 13th, 2015, 6:34 am

Thanks, Maria!

I have even thought that myself a couple times - then realized which project I was in and what it stood for. It DOES look like a surname.

commonsparrow3 · Post by **commonsparrow3** » January 15th, 2015, 12:30 pm

Section 43 -- (Medical Care, part 4) -- (length 30:12)

https://librivox.org/uploads/triciag/failureofinitiative_43_ushor_128kb.mp3

Post by **TriciaG** » January 15th, 2015, 3:18 pm

Thank you yet again.

Post by **TriciaG** » January 15th, 2015, 5:02 pm

Section 42, PL OK. I did notice the "Gulfport of Mexico" near 18:00, but I see that that is how it is in the text.

EDIT: Section 43 PL OK. Your voice was getting a little raspy at the end.

commonsparrow3 · Post by **commonsparrow3** » January 16th, 2015, 11:08 pm

TriciaG wrote:Section 42, PL OK. I did notice the "Gulfport of Mexico" near 18:00, but I see that that is how it is in the text.

EDIT: Section 43 PL OK. Your voice was getting a little raspy at the end.

"Gulfport of Mexico" threw me, too! But although it seemed to be a typo in the report, I read it as it was written.

Sorry about the raspiness. Do you think it's bad enough to need re-recording the final 2-3 minutes of that section?

Post by **TriciaG** » January 17th, 2015, 7:13 am

No, I think it's fine. It'll just give the listeners a little sympathy for you.

commonsparrow3 · Post by **commonsparrow3** » January 17th, 2015, 9:22 pm

TriciaG wrote:No, I think it's fine. It'll just give the listeners a little sympathy for you.

Got it

As an aside -- I've been listening to the recently-cataloged BP Oil Spill Report at the same time I've been reading sections of this Katrina Report, and I can't help feeling that one was better-written than the other. Certainly both reports are filled with important information, worth reading. But in the Oil Spill report, the prose seems to flow along so sensibly, even in the technical parts, that I rarely get lost in a sentence and have to go back to the beginning to unravel it, as I do frequently in the Katrina report. And it seems as though acronyms were used more sparingly in the other report, not sprinkled willy-nilly so that you have to keep searching back through the chapter to locate what some acronym stands for. Well, as you've also been involved with both projects, I was wondering what you thought of them comparatively. Is there really much difference in writing style between them -- or is it just me perhaps having government report burnout?

Post by **TriciaG** » January 18th, 2015, 7:41 am

I find this one harder to follow, yes. But is that because the subject matter is that much more complicated? The parts you're reading about which medical corps or volunteer group did what - the topic is much more complicated, I think. Could be written in a simpler way? Maybe; I don't know.

But yeah - this one is definitely longer and more complicated than the Deepwater Horizon report!

commonsparrow3 · Post by **commonsparrow3** » January 21st, 2015, 2:08 pm

Here's Section 44 -- (Medical Care, part 5) -- (length 33:57)

https://librivox.org/uploads/triciag/failureofinitiative_44_ushor_128kb.mp3

TriciaG wrote:I find this one harder to follow, yes. But is that because the subject matter is that much more complicated? The parts you're reading about which medical corps or volunteer group did what - the topic is much more complicated, I think. Could be written in a simpler way? Maybe; I don't know.

But yeah - this one is definitely longer and more complicated than the Deepwater Horizon report!

For some reason, this section seemed to go much more smoothly. Maybe taking a break for a few days helped. Or maybe the subject -- communications -- was just easier for me to grasp. (Though I still lifted my eyebrows at the writing occasionally. At one point you will hear me say "authentification". It's not a misreading of "authentication" -- it's what the text says!)

Anyway, since communications proved to be a fairly interesting subject, may I claim the Communications chapter -- Sections 24-27?

Post by **TriciaG** » January 21st, 2015, 2:28 pm

Thank you, and you're in for 24-27.

Post by **TriciaG** » January 22nd, 2015, 8:36 am

PL OK on 44. "Authentification" - ha!

Post by **TriciaG** » January 23rd, 2015, 5:27 pm

First 5 sections are reopened.