ould you go and make... Put that statement all on one page. Put a... Thank you. Great. And take away the period. You're right. And I agree that eight is very broad, but I think that's okay, because as Michelle said, people will have the questions ahead of time. And if they... And they can answer that however they choose. They can make that... They can make their time answering that question, whatever they want it to be. I think it's okay that it's vague. About number eight. Okay. Anna. Yeah. I think it's really important to keep the skills, knowledge, and experiences in there, because we don't mean... Well, I guess when I pitch putting experience in, and we can add a word to clarify this, it doesn't mean direct exact experience hiring a superintendent. It means what experiences do you bring that help you in this process, right? It might mean anything. And it allows people to share experiences that may not be automatically assumed to be direct by the folks interviewing them, but to explain how those are helpful, right? So it allows us to actually broaden our understanding of what beneficial experiences might be, even if they aren't a direct one in their candidate statement. So I think maybe if we could say... Or transferrable experience, or something like that to clarify. But I think that if we don't ask people to share the situations or the experiences that they've had, we might just get idealistic answers. And I think it's really important to hear how folks have navigated situations that they feel would be helpful to them in this scenario. So it doesn't mean exact experience in a superintendent search, but what are some relevant things? And that allows us to expand our own thinking about what transferrable skills and experiences there are. So I do stand by that, because I think it's really important so that we also are checking our own assumptions about what is relevant and in different scenarios. Ana, would you accept the fact that we say instead of include what skills include relevant skills? Sorry, what? Can you say that again? As you respond to the next two questions, please include relevant skills, knowledge, and experience you will bring to the school committee that will help the committee. Yep, that's fine. I think I just want to keep that skills knowledge experience in there. So we're going to change the word what to relevant. Jennifer Chow. Thank you, Ana. And I've just realized that this says please include, not just what. So I'm fine with it. Thank you. Thank you. That's why I wanted to make sure that you could see it all together, because I was trying to avoid what you were concerned about. Irv? I guess when I look at these questions, I'm thinking in terms of practicality. And you know, Jennifer, Ana, etc., all of them make really good points. But, you know, when I look at the reality of what we face, all I really want to hear from them is from these candidates is some reasonable grasp on reality in terms of what the school committee is facing and how they are going to be helping. So however we structure these questions, whether Jennifer or Ana or anyone else, it doesn't really matter to me because the reality is going to determine what it's going to end up being. So what I guess what I'm saying is, look, let's get to the meat of all of this, agree on the wording, etc., so we can make sure that we are going to be on track to meet our schedule to get these members on board as soon as possible. Right. So I'm going to, at this point, say we've got Michelle. This is really minor. In the beginning paragraph, I maybe to say in that second sentence to the school committee that will help the committee in this process or, you know, with this process because you start by saying that it's with these processes. Yeah, exactly. Okay. Thank you. Okay. I'm going to, these are the questions. Okay. The packet that I first introduced to everybody on the, oh God, when was it, the 28th of August, I guess, included the process. The process basically is that I will ask the questions. I will ask them by starting, if we say we have five people, I'll start with the first opening sentence. You start with person one through five. The first question, you start with person two through five and then come back and do one. So you just keep rotating so that the same person doesn't always go first. Okay. I would expect that each of you will have your own set of notes that you want to have. If we use rating sheets, those now become public record. So I don't believe we used rating sheets in the past. And after we get done, there is a period where we take a break. The 15 of us discuss the candidates and then we actually do the voting. And I believe we already discussed that we would vote for three. Athena? In the past, we had talked about counselors and the school committee members indicating there are three preferred candidates and then we would tally those and see how many, and then once that tally process is done, then there's a motion and vote to elect those three candidates, the three winning candidates. As long as they have a majority vote. The way we've done it in the past is to do this kind of tally process and then there's the formal vote and then the formal vote in the past has been, I think, usually unanimous. Yes, but the person, not that it has to be, but that's been our practice. So a person who moves forward has to have eight votes if there's 15 of us here. I have to check. I think that's correct. I think it's in the charter that way. Yeah, I think the charter has it. It's a majority of those voting, so it could be less if there are abstentions. Okay. All right. Or someone's absent. All right, we're now talking about the process. We're no longer talking about the questions. You can take the questions down. I just wanted to be sure. Irv had his hand up before we started talking about the process, so I wanted to make sure that. Okay. Irv?  I, and I think the school committee, Amherst School Committee, really has to know when this process is going to be completed. Are we still targeting September 26th for the final vote? Okay. My goal, and I think other people share it, is that we will finish this on the 26th of September, unless it's midnight and we're still going, and then it will be the 27th of September. But we will finish that night. Okay. Mandy Jo? Two things. CRC has generally, when we've done the rotation, not rotated in the same order, because sometimes it's found that if you're always following the same person, it's not necessarily, fair isn't the right word, but it's nicer if you get to follow different people every time. It's harder for the person determining how the questions and orders are going to be answered, but it's nicer to not always follow the same one. So I would request maybe we do that if everyone's in board with that. I'm fine with that. In terms of timing, I'm going to go back to my suggestion. I don't know whether people liked it or not, but if we get over a certain number of candidates, maybe we consider eliminating certain questions or options. I would probably propose not asking questions three or six and the closing statement to get us down to seven. Quick calculations, if we use 10 questions, and I'm including the closing and opening statements and those question numbers, 10 candidates is three hours and 20 minutes. Seven questions for 10 candidates is two hours and 20 minutes. So eliminating at that point is eliminating a whole hour of questions. And your recommendation was to eliminate, I think it's going to have to put the back up the criticism question, the one on the the one important strength strength and weakness. Okay. And then the closing statement. Okay. But that's just a proposal. I don't know whether where people stand. Okay. Okay. I'm looking for other comments. Dorothy. Have we had a discussion about people who are running for school committee would not be eligible for temporary positions? Are we going to have that discussion yet? But we will. Okay. Thank you. Jennifer Shau. Okay. So first, I don't think we should eliminate questions depending on the number of people who submit a letter of interest, based on the number of candidates we have for this position. I think that would involve a discussion of this group prioritizing the questions and I think that we would be here for a very long time. And I think we have already prioritized the questions that are important to us and we have already eliminated questions. So I don't think we should eliminate questions based on how many candidates there are. And I also don't think we should or that we can prohibit people from being considered for this role if they're running in the election. The charter states any registered voter can put their name forward. I think that would be very anti-democratic to limit someone who would be otherwise eligible from putting their name forward for this position. And let me just comment on that piece and then please go on. I totally agree with you. We cannot say just because you're running, you can't apply. That's your personal decision. And then lastly, I want to advocate to have a public comment period at the beginning of this meeting the way the town council does for almost all of your meetings. I realize this is a special meeting. The September 26 is going to be a special meeting, not a regular town council meeting, but I want to advocate for a period of public comment at the beginning of the September 26 meeting as you do for almost all of your meetings for people to express their opinions for us to hear from the public. I don't think it should be like in the middle of the process or like after the questions but before we vote, but just like at the beginning, like you always do for your standard practice, have a period of public comment. Thank you. Irv, you have your hand up. Yes. Definitely having a period of public comment is definitely something that we should do. And more importantly, everyone who applies for this, whether they're going to be running for or standing for an election, have a right to be a part of this process, to eliminate them would not be democratic at all. Okay, Jennifer Tubb. Well, I just want to say, I agree with that we should have a period of public comment, but my question was, for the three candidates that were each going to put as our top three choices, do we write that down on a piece of paper? I know it's public and submit it or we verbally state it. Okay, thank you. Pam Rooney. Yeah, I've been thinking about the opportunity for people to serve in this interim position. And I had come to the conclusion that I'm pretty clear that I would rather not have people who are running for the position as a bonafide elected official, simply because it feels that they will have their opportunity in November to express themselves. And maybe this is just then simply the way I vote. But it feels that we need a transition team and a group of folks who bring experience, hopefully all kinds of experience to the table to help us through this period. And I had thought that perhaps we would have a conversation about this and to be a little more clear about our expectations for filling these spots. Would other people like to comment on that issue? Yeah, I can see there are pros and cons to both allowing people to do that.  But I can also see that it's good to just have a different set of people. And I don't know if I'm open to both. And I wonder if you need to hear the pros and cons. But I had a question about the public comment. Should I wait for that one? Let's first just deal with this question. I think with public comment, I'm all about wanting to hear people's lived experiences, their perspectives. In this particular case, we are having a meeting for a very specific purpose for which we're creating all these criteria and questions that we're going to ask. And then based on that, we are as a committee going to come to some, you know, consensus or not, but we'll make decisions. And I'm just curious what are people who are proposing for a public comment? What would be the what are your intentions for having that public comment? Especially given that we're having it up front without having heard what the responses are from people. So is it people coming in, bringing in their relatives and friends to advocate for them? Is that in giving people an opportunity to do that or advocate for their friends? And because we haven't yet heard what the responses are and the public hasn't really heard what the responses are of all the different candidates. So what I'm just I would love to hear what people's intentions were for having a public comment here. Okay. So we're sticking to two issues right now. One is the issue of public comment at the meeting at the beginning. The second is the issue of whether or not we have it's whether or not you personally feel that people who are presently or as of tomorrow will be officially running for office should be considered. I am going to address the second one. I don't believe that there is any way you can legally prohibit a person from submitting their name if they're running for office. And so I if you per if you believe that that's not the best candidate, that's your decision. That's my personal opinion. Um, but I don't think we can say we got seven applications and four of them are running for office. And so therefore we're only only going to interview three. So Jennifer, you already weighed in on this, I think. No, go ahead. Jennifer, I'm sorry. So I, I don't know that anyone was suggesting that we not accept statements of interest or interview candidates. It would more be if we had a conversation and there was sort of an agreement on a policy that, you know, we would not want the council to kind of put our thumb on the scale by selecting candidates who are also running. Maybe that's an individual decision we make. Um, I, it feels like maybe we can't have, we, we don't know who submitted it. We don't know how many statements of interest we've received. So what if we only have statements of interest from candidates for the school committee? So that I think it's maybe a little early to have that conversation. Although, so I don't know if this would be a conversation we'd have after the interviews. You know, are we going to, so after the interviews, are we going to have a, we're going to have a discussion? Yes, we are. Right. So maybe that is the time to have that conversation. Um, I mean, because again, we don't know how many statements of interest are even going to be received right now. No idea. But I have, you know, my, my personal feeling is that if we have good candidates that are not and school committee candidates, that it would help to depoliticize the process to select interim members who will only be interim members that are not also declared candidates. That's my personal opinion. Lynn, if, Lynn, if I may, I'm going to strongly advise that the council exercise caution when having this discussion about limiting the eligible applicants. I think the law is fairly clear about who's eligible and all you have to do is be a voter and Amherst. So whether you call it a policy or what have you, I think that should be left to the council deliberation following the interviews. To set criteria. Thank you, Andy. Yeah, I'm the first issue and we're just discussing. I agree with everything that Jennifer said, so I don't have to repeat it. And as far as Jennifer who just spoke, the second question, however, on the public comment, I am very uncomfortable. This is a special meeting. Council rules are clear that we do not commit to having any public comment at special meetings. And I think that we're all having trouble with the first question because we realize that it has a, there's an interrelationship between two issues running for the November election for school committee and applying for this position. And it's mixing those two things and having public comment is inviting electioneering is during public comment. And I just don't feel comfortable with that. Randy Joe. So I'm uncomfortable with the location or the way this conversation is, deliberation is going. Our agenda has two specific things on here for school committee vacancies discussion of the interview questions and of the election process, not of any criteria or anything. It is clear that the charter allows anyone who is a registered voter to apply. And I believe it improper to discuss any criteria tonight that any of us might be considering or not considering until we are in the deliberation phase after the interviews. I, I, Mandy Joe, I totally agree with you. I think that is also what Athena has been suggesting to all of us so that I think that the discussion as to whether or not you are a candidate for office for school committee or any other candidate for that matter. And you apply, it's not an issue we will continue discussing. So we're now back to the, the discussion about public comment. And Jennifer. So someone asked why, why, what the objective of public comment would be at the September 26 meeting. And I wanted to say the objective is the same reason you have public comment for all your meetings is that you want to hear from members of the public about a decision you're going to be making. Often those public comments happen at the beginning of a meeting before you've discussed whatever it is you're going to be discussing. And I, and I don't think this should be any different. The members of the public have a right to communicate to the public as well as to the council, how they think we should vote, you know, we being the council on the school committee. I've now been part of two special meetings when you have had public comment. So it doesn't seem to be a rule that you have to follow that special meetings don't have public comment. So because we want to hear, as elected officials, we want to hear from the public and we want the public to be able to say publicly because that's what public comment is all about, what, how they think we should vote. As for it being electioneering, I mean, it's only electioneering if it could only fall into the category of electioneering if the person being talked about is on the ballot. But we don't know who's going to be submitting their name for these vacancies. So to say now, we're going to prove we're going to not have public comment because it might be electioneering. What if everyone who submits a letter of interest is not a candidate, then it won't be electioneering. And then but then we will have decided now to not allow public comment. So I see no reason not to have public comment. We should we should all want to hear from the public about how they think we should vote. That is the public's right. Erv. Erv, we can't hear you. Hello. Now we can. Lynn, you might have been overlooking my hand. She's been up and you've gone around a number of times. I'm not sure what you're seeing in my hand or not. But in in relationship to what Jennifer was saying, you know, there is no way that we should present public comment just because of the fear that there might be electioneering. We should not let the fear of something happening determine what we consider to be right and just here. And something that is right for me is that on that night when we have our we're going to be deliberating candidates, it's going to be public. The people know this is going to be public. That to say we're not going to take public comment before this would not seem to be a correct kind of decision to make. Michelle. I support a public comment. But I have a question about timing. Is it possible at this stage to begin the meeting at, say, 5 30? So that we would, I'm not saying we would limit it to a half an hour, but so that we would add a half an hour cushion in the front end. Or do folks think that that's, you know, I think our meeting tonight might have started at 5 30. I don't know how well attended it was, but I just am thinking about if we have to get it done at that meeting, if we could add more time, it might be helpful. I'll speak to that in a moment. Let me take other comments. Bandy Joe. I'm struggling with the benefit of a public comment period at the location in the meeting that has been proposed, which is before interviews. Because there will be nothing new for people to comment on other than what was published in the packet, but anyone who would like to comment on something published in the packet may be able make can file a written comment that gets published in our packets that everyone can have access to before the meeting. And so I, I'm not sure that a public comment period before interviews take place adds any benefit to the meeting that is not already there for us as counselors and school committee members from what we will have received prior to the meeting in written form. I could see a benefit to a public comment period after interviews when there is more information that everyone has received because of the interviews. I don't know whether I would support that or not. I don't know where I stand, but if we were to do a public comment period in either location in the meeting, given that the meeting is to determine and decide and vote on who to appoint to the school committee, it seems to me that public comments could be completed in one minute that people would not need three minutes to advocate for who they may want us to appoint. And that limiting would serve a couple of purposes. It would allow more people to make public comment if we allow a public comment period, but it would also serve to hopefully get us to a resolution of what our goal is for that evening at a more reasonable time when people might be able to stay and watch and be here if they come in person. It is a meeting of high interest that I don't think we really want to be making decisions at midnight for because that's not accessible to the public. And so if we do do public comment in the meeting, I think this would be a time to shorten the length of each public comment, ensure that each public commenter can only speak once, and make sure that we're getting to the appointment part and deliberation and voting part at a reasonable time in the meeting. We've received as counselors comments in the past that our meetings go too late, and once they hit a certain time they become basically inaccessible to a large number of people. Thank you. Jennifer. So I want to point out that written public comments that are submitted to the town council are not as far as I can tell part of the meeting packet. They are posted on the town council website, but in a separate location from the agenda and the meeting packet. I was informed of this and they're posted in a PDF in two week chunks. I was informed of this a while ago, but I had forgotten about it. And today when people mentioned that they had submitted written public comment for this meeting, I hadn't seen it because I looked at the packet, but I didn't go look at the town council comments section, which is a different part of your website, which is not part of the packet. And I wasn't even informed that that was a thing as a member. I was one of the two remaining members of the Amherst School Committee. So there's that. There's that like people don't necessarily know where to go look for public comments. And public comments are not just for the town council. They are also for the public. Also, I think it's just a good practice to allow people several ways of submitting a comment, both written and oral and verbally in person, to say we don't need to have in-person live public comment because people can just email us. Well, people have different ways that they prefer to communicate. And I think offering different venues is smart, is smart and accessible. As for the timing, I mean, again, my suggestion is to have a public comment period at the beginning because that's when public comment usually is for your meetings and for school committee meetings. The public knows that we're going to be making a decision that night and they want to give us their input on that decision before we make it. Does it make more sense to have that after the interviews and after the candidates have spoken? Well, I kind of feel like it doesn't even really make sense. I don't think it's any better than because it's like we will all have just heard the same things that people have said. And then we want to hear from the public to comment on what we all just heard, but we all just heard like as opposed to if people want to advocate for a certain person to be selected by us, or if they want to suggest to us that we keep in mind certain things as we're listening to the candidates, that can and should happen at the beginning of a meeting the way that is your past practice of having public comment at the beginning of a meeting before you make a decision. Thank you. Athena, I need to ask a question. We have posted pretty publicly in many places that this meeting begins at 6 o'clock. Can we post the meeting at 5.30 at this point and have public comment for the first half hour? The notice on the bulletin board says the meeting starts at 6. You could do a special meeting earlier at 5 or 5.30 if you wanted just for public comment, I suppose. But the notice says the meeting begins at 6. So I'm hearing various things, but if we're going to have public comment it's at the beginning. It has been suggested that perhaps we meet a little earlier like 5.30. I know that that is difficult for some people because of work and because of family. Excuse me. And I'm having now been here since 5.30. I'm beginning to feel aware and tear. Okay. Shalini? So I completely agree when we have public comment to offer as many different channels for that. I'm still trying to understand, sincerely understand that if we have for example 100 people asking before we even heard the candidates and we have 100 people saying we should vote for XYZ and then we actually hear the candidates and there is a person who is new to the political arena but is bringing in their skill sets and so forth and offering and so would that imply that because 50 people have asked us 100 people asked for that one person that we don't and there are three other candidates who are bringing in really good skill sets for this and those people did not hear these candidates because they are only speaking out of their experience and knowledge of the candidates they're advocating but they haven't had a chance to listen because they spoke before so they haven't had a chance to listen to all the other candidates so it feels like that's advocacy versus really looking at what is best for the school committee for our students for our teachers all of that and so it's I feel like I'm being put in a situation that's I don't understand what would be the it's like it's like letting people down and creating a process that's gonna that could let people down that we asked you to come and share what you want to say and then we're going to go ahead and vote in a completely different direction because we heard this and I think it does a disservice to people who might be new to this process but are willing to now step into this role and may not have as many advocates for them but they are putting themselves out there and so and and so I'm still not hearing like what am I so if I hear 100 yeah I'm still struggling with what what am I so when we hear when we do have public meetings and we invite public comment it's to hear people's lived experiences and when we do appointments like we do in CRC we don't have I don't think we have a public comment to get people's feedback on who we should appoint so that's where I think it's a little different okay thank you Dorothy I I feel like I'm in a strange universe I have I truthfully have never heard of having public comment before a deliberation where we're going to be choosing people it sounds like some kind of political rally taking place beforehand and I'm thinking of the candidates this could be creating a very charged atmosphere which will influence how they behave and how they feel the public will have a chance to have their say they are electing a new school committee in November this is an interim appointment process and I don't all the appointments that have been made since the and the five years have been on the council I'm not aware that there were public comment periods beforehand so I I think it's a terrible idea I think it's an absolutely terrible idea and we'll be make it make it so people really don't want to show up for an interview because it's hard enough to come to an interview but then if you know that you're going to be have this people kind of agitating and we don't know what for we do not know who or what and they will not be able to prepare themselves for this so I really hope we don't do it thank you okay thank you Anika um yes I think you know Dorothy Dorothy Pan was raised a point that is I think will will happen and we're walking into also for what others have said we don't know who exactly will submit if we have a comment public comment beforehand I mean we've seen this before this it will not be our first rodeo when the public gathers and comes


going to take up another very interesting fact. You know we encounter a variety of numbers on a daily basis be it phone number, our roll number or let's say a car's license plate number. We encounter several such numbers on a daily basis. We also know that these numbers are made up of digits and we also know that there are 10 digits 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 and 9. But the question is why do we call these digits digits. So if you remember friends during a childhood we all used to use our fingers to calculate simple sums and because of this reason friends we call these numbers digits. I hope now a new fact has been added to your knowledge base.


26-year-old Ron Carno of Maplewood, New Jersey in his first Olympics, preparing to swim in the 200-meter individual medley. The undescribable feeling that, wow, I finally made it and here I am representing the United States. As Ron marched to the opening ceremony, his father, Peter, minutes after catching his son's eye and waving to him, suffered a heart attack and died at the Olympic Stadium. When my father tragically passed away at the opening ceremony, that was the darkest moment of my life. Seeing how meaningful it was for the physician to help my own parents, that was the catalyst for my interest in medicine. Something has taught me the ability to deal with adverse circumstances. Karen Gillian, she's a world-class diver and when I learned about her disc herniation and her lower back, it was really something that I thought I could help her with. It really paid off because now she's back in training and she's doing great.


Hi guys, Jason here from Nathaniel and let's learn IC Fire by Ed Sheeran. The song is basically on a B flat minor key. So just remember that. Some people try to simplify it by playing it on the B minor key. So the B minor is a derivative of D major. So they are pretty, they are the same scale, just a different feel. And the B flat minor would be a derivative of D flat major or C sharp major. So basically to get a minor scale, you form the scale built out of the sixth of the major scale. So I have written down the chords of actually both scales in the chord chart. I am however going to teach you on the original scale, which is B flat minor. So if you find that to be challenging, if you're not able to voice those chords easily on whichever instrument you're playing, then perhaps you can go to B minor. So I've written down the chords on B minor. So in the original, it's on B flat minor, let's go through the same. So it starts with a drone where you don't have to really do much. You can just play like a B flat. You can also play like a fifth chord, you know, while he's singing. And just play that. What I'm also doing is I'm holding my pedal. So it's allowing me to just play freely all over the piano. You can even layer the piano with some pad or some strings just to make it very droney. Okay. And then you have the tune played on the guitar in the first intro. And then in the bridge, it's played on the violins. So there's a slight difference. So I've just modified the tune for piano. And then we can take it from there. So this is how the tune will go. The chords are B flat minor, F sharp major, A flat major, and back to B flat minor. I repeat. So if you have your guitar friend or some other musician playing this tune, perhaps you can just stick with the chords and they sound really nice together. You could also play the melody yourself. Let's see how that works. Okay, a little slower. So just to get that first.  So F sharp, A flat, B flat minor again. F sharp, A flat. And there's a part in the middle of the song where the violins and the string, the ensemble plays something very similar, but they go something like so they just hold the chords there. And now the tune. So at the A flat and the B flat minor, they do the tune. So that's something you could try out maybe in the bridge. So let's show that again. While at the intro, or if you want, you can combine both together and play it. Or you can just use them interchangeably in the song. Like quite like that. Using both sometimes as well. Okay, so that's your intro and bridge. Actually not bridge. It's more the thing. There's another bridge, which is a vocal bridge. This is more the instrumental or the interlude. So let's now just do the verse, which is there almost three times, I think three or four times in the song. And then we'll do the chorus together. So again, it starts on B flat minor. Lot of the sections start on B flat minor. And I think try out this hold of the chord.  It'll make it a little easier on your fingers and curve the thumb out a little more. Okay. And the left hand can just do the duty of playing the name of the chord or the root of the chord. Let's see how this sounds. Every alternate chord, I'm actually playing it at the offbeat. I'm not doing it's a little bit traditional, basically every chord twice. This will work more for pop songs and songs which have a very consistent groove. In this case, he goes pretty much the whole song. The first chord is at the onbeat one and two and three and four. And so always play the second chord at the end of the two or between two and three. Let me count it out for you just taking the first two chords. B flat minor and D flat major. And two and three and four. Repeat one and two and three and four and let me finish line one. B flat, D flat, A flat, F sharp and it repeats. Okay. So the only change in the verse is the last chord of line two where instead of playing the traditional F sharp, we play an E flat minor seventh. So let's see how that sounds. B flat minor, D flat major, A flat major and we go to E flat minor seventh. So this is how I'm voicing it. Okay. So try to remember that voicing or you can go like this if you wish, but I would prefer this voicing. It's like playing an F sharp here and an E flat here. That gives you the same effect. So let's look at the first three lines of the verse. Remember the offbeat at every alternate chord. Four and A flat, four and B flat, D flat, A flat, E flat minor seventh. And in the first time, I think he goes back and does the whole verse once more. So you'll have to probably hear the song and get the structure from there. Okay. So whenever he says and the flames there, that will be the last line or verse one. That's E flat minor, F minor, F sharp major and you hold F sharp major for another two counts. Into two twice. So that's obviously the coolest part of the song. However, the chords are very similar to the intro where you did right. So the I C five chorus pretty much has the same chords. So if we do it with chords, you can play it strong, maybe two hits here for every chord and here one hit. So I C five and no inside the room, I see fire. That's three times. So you can end with an E flat major, but instead of playing the major, you can play E flat, A flat, B flat, this voicing, which makes it more of a suspended chord. So last bar of the chorus, I see five A flat or you can just play a fifth chord. I advise you not to play a full E flat major, maybe just a fifth. So that's just the last line of the chorus in the hope that you remember me. That's only the singer and then goes back to the other parts. Another thing you could try on the keyboard is to also play the bass line, which goes C flat and then it's just chord roots. I've written that down here. You can either go high F sharp or low F sharp. Let's see how that sounds. B flat minor, B flat minor, F sharp, A flat, B flat minor, F sharp, B flat and then pump pump pump pump. And then it goes to the bridge, which happens only once in the song. That's E flat, B flat minor. That's into three. E flat, B flat minor, D flat, A flat, and E flat, B flat, minor, D flat, A flat. The last line of the bridge you do, this line. So the bridge takes you back to the chorus. Let's look at the bridge again. At B flat minor, B flat, A flat, and then E flat with F. F bass, F sharp, A, just make a note of the D flat with F bass. Let's play D flat major chord in the right hand and a different bass, which is F in the left hand. Na na na na na na na na Na na na na na na Bacchorus I see fire Turn turn turn C fire right those are the sections of this amazing song I See Fire by Ed G dating right so all the best playing it and as always have fun cheers


Good day, May 40 here. So I'm watching this Hulu show Dope sick it is so powerful So powerful now disclaimer Overwhelmingly Opioid abuse is not of legal medication It's overwhelming the deaths and destruction coming from opioids today comes from fentanyl Okay, it doesn't come from prescription medication, so Sacklers Certainly culpable for a lot of evil in the world a lot of death and a lot of destruction But they're not They're not genocidal maniacs, right? They're not the primary people responsible for the white death not the primary people responsible for the opioid problem that we have today But certainly they've done a lot of a lot of bad things So I was reading a Steve sailor essay last week making the point that there's no longer a recreational drug culture Because fentanyl there's in so many recreational drugs Including I guess cocaine and heroin and uppers and downers that you're taking your life, you know In much greater risk now than ever before thanks to fentanyl anyway dope sick it is shining a light an incredibly Big problem in this country over the past 25 years with regard to the Sacklers and the marketing of oxycontin and how they Took advantage of the FDA they perverted the FDA and the Food and Drug Administration and the DEA and the politicians and big government and they got them all in their pocket and they've got to paddle their poison and Played a significant role in destroying tens of thousands of lives now. I don't know where I stand If someone gets addicted to oxycontin. Do I blame the Sacklers the the distributors?  Under owner debt or like I didn't ask for any my addiction. You didn't ask for any of your addiction So I'm not using word blame, but yeah, my inclination is if you get addicted to opioids That's primarily about you and your makeup. It's not primarily about the substance that plenty of people can use opioids Recently and responsibly. It's like most people can read Mein Kampf and they're not going to lose their head over it but It may be point zero one percent of people in Mein Kampf and it lose their head and lose their career and lose The nice beautiful lies that they've created because you know, they can't use the calm for responsibly Right, I think most people could read the Communist manifesto without you know losing their life over it But some people will just take it way too far But this this we lose serious dope sick. It's just so powerful about the marketing of Oxycontin that the corruption of our major government agencies such as DEA and FDA and the Corruption of big medicine corruption of medical schools and how the Sacklers, you know Have had the ambition anyway of being the most philanthropic family in the nation and they did give a lot of you know, huge philanthropy, but it was all Not that wasn't all it was substantially based on peddling poison But Oxycontin on the other hand I'm overstating it because it wasn't poisoned to even necessarily most people who talk it But it was poisoned to a substantial number and all then all the lives that they negatively affected. So anyway, I'm I'm watching it. I'm at the end of episode four and I think I'm just gonna have to watch it straight through I've got to watch episodes five and six. I can't stop. This is so good, but I'm watching it and I'm a little bit introspective after my appearance on politically provoke yesterday and I can't get out of my head this this thing that happened to me circa 1986 I think it was summer of 86 and I was feeling happy and Here's what happened Here's the map. So this is in Rockland, California. This is Sierra College Boulevard And so I'm coming here from Newcastle and then I think I exit onto I get onto Sierra College Boulevard I believe And then I'm coming over the freeway and I'm coming down here and then I think there are lights here There were anyway, and there's a big red light for me, but I'm coming over the hill and I'm I'm listening to music And I'm traveling at about 70 miles an hour And there's a red light in front of me But I'm having such a good time listening to the music because I'm driving about 70 miles an hour in my 1968 Volkswagen bug That I don't pay any attention to the red light until I'm just about right under it and There's a whole line of cars Prepared to turn in front of me like right here They're all prepared to turn in front of me. So I'm coming down here at 70 miles an hour I'm paying no attention to the stop light the red light There's a line of cars preparing to turn in front of me and go up Sierra College Boulevard And so the only reason that I'm not a mass motor The only reason that I didn't plow into a completely innocent safe family in a car and kill everyone in that car through my carelessness is Divine grace or good luck or the forbearance of those people who are waiting in line who had a green light to turn in front of me and Somehow they noticed I wasn't paying any attention. I Said that's the only reason I'm not a mass motor Like that's the only reason that I'm not spending the rest of my life in prison. It's just so humbling Like with my carelessness and that think about all the other examples in my life Where the type of carelessness that I exhibited in that instance I've also exhibited but I've just completely, you know blocked it removed it or lost it from my memory. I Just think about all the times that your carelessness has could have been or was responsible for the destruction of untold numbers of lives and Just think about that think about that there are some situations where we would be the concentration camp guards And there are just other situations where we'll be the concentration camp inmates There are some situations where in our other carelessness.  We all have an erotic map. We're all programmed to be incredibly aroused by certain scenarios and Pornographers make money by playing to those fantasies and so if we're in a vulnerable state, I mean just I'm just thinking about vulnerability watching dope sec and thinking about how vulnerable we all are I've interviewed thousands of people one thing that I've carried away from it is that we're all far more Everybody's incredibly vulnerable far more vulnerable than I thought of When you interview people you sense there, you know their weaknesses and that their vulnerability and so we have pornography that we're vulnerable to or shopping or food or Certain social scenarios that will lead us down a bad path and The reason that some of us haven't destroyed ourselves is that we by the grace of God haven't been placed in situations that would lead to our destruction or We've been blessed with the right genetics or the right, you know, social imprinting to stay away from those situations that lead to kind of social destruction you see in this This Hulu series dope sec and and just this notion of our own vulnerability like you know I went on politically provoked I you know barely knew anyone on there, you know could have been an absolute horror show and it didn't go too well the first 20 30 minutes because there were technical problems and it just wasn't smooth and I've been in five lawsuits and just think about, you know, how information can come out in a lawsuit They could just absolutely upend your life. I guess that's our American crime story too. I just finished the later season It's so incompetent that the very first graphic in American crime story the final episode about the Bill Clinton impeachment is that they misspelled September They spell it S-T-E-M-E-B-E-R Right Vox they misspelled September in the first opening graphic of the final episode of that show. I Mean who was responsible for that But think of like Bill Clinton's, you know vulnerability There's a certain mouth that he cannot say no to right. There's a certain personality There's a certain, you know woman he has a hard time saying no to And then certain women just have a hard time saying no to power and Then as I think about my own social life how I can go to a party with a hundred women But I would zero in on the woman who's got a you know a father who's a sex addict and she'll zero in on me and You know, we'll scratch each other's itch Which is great for a few weeks or a few months until it just all goes to hell so just thinking about vulnerability and the power of situation and and How our own carelessness can devastate the lives of other people and I think that puts you an appropriate level of Humility to go through life not that you think you love yourself But you just recognize your own vulnerability Therefore you are more understanding about other people's vulnerability and you're less likely to have an exaggerated sense of your own Importance and your own morality and your own wisdom