See http://mtsneffelspress.com/2010/03/20/afb-moved/. The word “plug in” is a hyperlink that will take you to the folks who make a WP plug-in that was necessary to use the php “include” command. The Weatherlink software uploads new info to the site every 15 minutes. The page in WordPress simply “includes” the uploaded files. Unfortunately, the “include” command won’t work without the plug-in, which is free.

I tried to do the same with my website. I also using a Davis station and WordPress.
I have seen your comment on the plugin site. How did you achieve this? Ok i`m not so good at coding….

Thank you for your answer!
Best regards
Patric

I just left you a message, but I’m a writer with MontroseStyle magazine. For our upcoming fall/winter issue we were hoping to do a bit on local authors and I thought you might be a good contact.

I’m on a tight deadline, so the earlier you can get back to me the better. Thank you!

Eve — donegan.eve@gmail.com or 318-8439

My name is Hillary King, and I am an emergency management consultant with a company called AMEC Earth and Environmental in Boulder. We are currently writing wildfire mitigation plans for Ouray, Montrose, Gunnison and Delta counties, and I came across your blog when I was looking for pictures of Buckhorn Lakes for the Montrose County plan. I was wondering if we could please use one of your images of Buckhorn Lakes for that community’s section in the Montrose plan, provided that we give you full credit and acknowledgement in the plan for the image. We use the photos to illustrate fuel types and topography in each community, but our partners from West Region Wildfire Council and the Colorado State Forest Service were unable to get very far into the Buckhorn Lakes community to take pictures due to snow.

Thank you very much for your time and have a good weekend,
Hillary King

I liked the review sample of TUT, a lot.

I like the way you manage to add characters right and left while still making each one a realistic person. Although I don’t know this, it wouldn’t surprise me if each and every character had a full back story. Leaving the reader with this impression takes skill and talent in character development. (Or else it takes a whole lot of back stories!)

Although he came and went awfully quick, I love the dragon and look forward to his next appearance. Most fantasy writers describe dragons as if they could withstand 50 psf wing loading and generate 500 shp to maintain level flight. I’ll bet those poorly scaled dragons irritate you more than they bother me, since I’m not an aviator. Anyway, it’s nice to “see” a more reasonable dragon in a fantasy.

I personally find the idea of a planet inhabited by several intelligent races stretches my credulity. Unfortunately, the success of the Narnia books and Lord of the Rings means I just have to put up with stretch marks on my credulity.

I see an early comment about the map. In my opinion you shouldn’t worry much about a pretty map or USGS accuracy. Exact locations are seldom crucial to the story and when I read a book which contains a map, I seldom if ever refer back to the map. If it’s good enough for your own reference, so you can write clear directions into the story, then it’s good enough.

There’s a silly omission when we first drive up to the mine site. When we get to the steep switchback road, we shift into “compound low”. When we reach the top of this steep stretch, we don’t shift the differential back to high. This gives the reader a jar when we reach the mine area turnoff and AGAIN shift into compound low, or “double low” as they say here in the midwest. At most, it will take one sentence to fix.

I have a real problem with Prince Rainier. He seems to have way too much influence over us. Is this his magic; is something more sinister afoot? Is the author leading up to a denouement where we help the Prince onto the throne only to discover his dark side? His character is confusing, and the subtle hints are muddied. I’ll take my adventure fantasy clear cut! Thank you.

Now comes the long part of this email. I hope you’re up right now. If you’re on a down cycle, please read the rest some time when you’re up. I’m really trying to pass along an insight which might help, but the implication could be a little distressing.

I enjoyed the review piece of TUT. I like the books about Odd Thomas, by Dean Koontz. I also found myself rereading the first chapter of a novel I’d started writing some time ago, and loved it. What do these all have in common? They’re written in the first person, in a style which invites the reader to identify with the protagonist.

Fine, good, great, so I liked them all. So why am I currently rewriting my novel? I’m changing the person and style from first person chronological, to third person omniscient. And what will seem odd at first is, I won’t enjoy reading it in the new style as much as I did the original.

Why?

Because once I realized WHY I liked the first style so much, it became obvious why so many critics and writing mentors recommend avoiding that style. I don’t know why they don’t spell it out…

When a characterization invites me to identify with the protagonist and experience the action well enough to /grab/ me, then it will serve equally well to /reject/ other readers. For example: the character in my novel is a highly intelligent man who has broken new ground in scholastic and theological philosophy. The story he’s immersed into doesn’t depend on those characteristics, and the story is compelling on its own. So I have a whole universe of readers who would like the story, but the protagonist is a strong character, and it’s narrated from his point of view. As a result, I’ve just rejected the following readers: all women; everyone with a bad attitude toward philosophy (at least 80% of those who had to take it in college); everyone with a poor regard for theology; anyone who considers themselves a non intellectual. Not only that, but it’s almost impossible to sell a first- person narrative to the moviemakers, and my novel could make a great movie.

That’s why first person narratives don’t work. Obviously they actually do work, because the Odd Thomas novels mentioned earlier made it onto best seller lists. But how much wider an audience would they attract if they were written in another style? More important IMHO, how many more readers could have enjoyed the great stories?

I loved your blog entry and picture about trying a long bow. As a kid I read some historical works regarding the English long bow and its use in battle. Then I read Heinlein’s “Glory Road”, in which the protagonist picks up an English long bow for the first time in his life and proceeds to drive two arrows into the bullseye. HA! What silliness… Except that shortly after reading that novel, I had the opportunity to actually shoot a bow for the first time, a cheap fiberglass long bow at summer camp. I reviewed what I’d read in the battle instructions: pull until your thumb touches your ear, then release; line up the arrow head on the target; recall where the arrow struck, relative to the arrow head; with the next shot move the arrow head to compensate. My first arrow hit the dirt to the side of the target (50 feet away). My second arrow hit the target. My third and last hit the bullseye. When the counselor yelled, “Lucky hit!” I demanded three more arrows. All three nearly scraped each other, in the bullseye. Suddenly Heinlein no longer seemed fantastic!

And the inside of my left arm was bloody!!! :O