A tool that parses emails by enhancing the Python standard library, extracting all details into a comprehensive object.

Python 444 Updated Jun 11

structured outputs for llms

Python 13.2k 2 issues need help Updated Jun 15

Python port of Google's libphonenumber

Python 3.8k Updated Jun 5

No I am not referring to any politicians in the first part of the title above.  That would be rude and disrespectful. Having said that how many people currently feel that there is anything wrong with being rude to Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and other dead @*+#heads? Not very many. Having said that how many people feel that there is anything wrong with being rude to the following living people namely Putin, Netanyahu, Trump etc.? Probably a lot more than you think.

Exactly how desperate are they for more water in Waterloo Region? The fools are so desperate that as was hinted at months ago they are considering reactivating contaminated wells that were shut down decades ago along the Grand River  at the south end of Kitchener and just north of Cambridge. To be specific we are talking about wells that are known as GUDI which stands for Groundwater Under Direct Influence of surface water. The surface water is conveniently located downgradient from the former Forsythe Oil and Breslube and is currently known as Safety-Kleen in Breslau.  Yes Breslau is right across the Grand River from Kitchener and is a fine example of how we do our remediation of contaminated soils and waters here. Yes this can be attributed to a very strong Conservative work ethic and ideology that diminishes and suborns  the importance of clean air, water and soils to the far more important padding of private parties bank accounts often at the cost of the public interest. 

Interestingly the article in today's K-W Record on page A3 by Bill Jackson refers to wells only on the west side of the Grand River. Now of course the wells' names and numbers are listed although at least a couple are missing. In fact who but me and long term Breslau locals plus consultants and well paid suits have any idea of how many wells are missing and which side of the Grand River they are on? Coincidentally (not) I am sure that the missing wells named K70 and K71 are on the east side of the Grand River.

Yes the east side putting them even closer to Safety-Kleen and ground and groundwater contamination from the former pigpens located there. That contamination includes the former "Black Lagoon" which does not refer to black gold (oil) as it is sometimes referred to in Texas.  Well actually maybe it does because also nearby was/is ? a former sub-surface pool of oil floating on the water table enriched with industry's finest Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). Now keep in mind the Grand River itself may somewhat block further westward flow of contaminated shallow aquifer water but it does not deter contaminant flow in deeper aquifers westward underneath the river. I expect that these other wells are screened into those deeper aquifers. 

Do not fuss citizens of Waterloo Region. Good Conservative ideology believes that not just a few but the many can have their thirst quenched by toxic groundwater diluted by both dozens and more other wells as well as by the river water and its' accompanying algae and odours. By the way instead of being honest about the gross contamination left by Forsythe and Breslube; the Region who shut all these wells down  35 to 45 years ago blamed the shutdown on algae and accompanying odour issues.

“I can’t ask people for money.”
“I don’t want to ask my friends…
what if they say no?”
“Isn’t that the fundraiser’s job?”

If you’ve ever heard (or thought) these things as a board member, you’re not alone. In fact, discomfort with fundraising is one of the most common barriers to building a strong, sustainable organization.

But here’s the reality: in today’s climate of funding uncertainty, fundraising is no longer something a board can “delegate and forget.” It’s a shared responsibility—and a powerful opportunity.

There was a time when hiring a fundraising professional meant a board could check the box and move on. Not anymore.

Today, financial sustainability depends on a whole-of-organization approach, and the board plays a critical role. Board members bring networks, credibility, and influence—assets no staff team can replicate on their own.

The challenge? Most board members weren’t recruited with fundraising in mind.

That’s why reframing the role is essential.

When people think of fundraising, they often imagine the moment of asking for money. But that’s just one small part of a much larger process: the donor cycle.

There are many ways for board members to contribute—often in ways that feel natural and comfortable:

• Identifying potential supporters: Who in your network might care about the organization’s mission?
• Making introductions: Inviting a colleague to a tour, a talk, or a meeting.
• Building relationships: Helping create trust and awareness over time.
• Participating in asks: Joining staff when the moment is right.
• Stewardship: Thanking donors and strengthening ongoing relationships.

Not every board member needs to do everything. The key is finding the role that fits.

Many board members underestimate the reach of their own networks.

You don’t have to ask your closest friends for money. Often, your greatest impact comes from simply opening doors—introducing people, creating opportunities for connection, or sharing the organization’s story.

A speaking opportunity at your Rotary Club.
An introduction at a staff meeting.
A casual conversation that sparks interest.

These moments build the foundation for future support.

Fundraising is fundamentally about relationships.

Rarely does someone make a significant gift after a single conversation. It takes time—multiple touchpoints, growing trust, and a deepening understanding of the organization’s impact.

Board members play a crucial role here. Your credibility and connections help build that trust in ways staff alone cannot.

And when the time comes for an “ask,” you’re not starting from scratch—you’re building on a relationship.

One common fear is: What if I don’t know all the details?

The good news: you don’t need to.

In fundraising meetings, staff bring subject-matter expertise. Your role is different—you’re there as a passionate advocate, someone who believes in the work and can speak authentically about why it matters.

That’s often what resonates most.

If there’s one place where almost every board member feels comfortable, it’s stewardship.

A thank-you call.
A handwritten note.
A simple expression of appreciation.

These small acts make a big difference—and they strengthen the relationships that sustain organizations over time.

Let’s name it: fundraising can feel uncomfortable.

But that discomfort is natural—and manageable. Here are a few simple ways to build confidence:

• Remember your purpose: You’re not asking for yourself—you’re inviting others to support something meaningful.
• Focus on relationships, not transactions: Most interactions are about connection, not asking.
• Be authentic: Share why you believe in the organization.
• Practice: Confidence grows with experience—especially when working alongside others.
• Prepare well: Good briefing materials and clear goals make a huge difference.
• Be yourself: You don’t need a script—just sincerity.

Fundraising isn’t about pressure or persuasion. It’s about connection, belief, and shared purpose.

For board members, it’s not an extra burden—it’s an opportunity to amplify impact.

And when boards fully engage in fundraising, organizations don’t just survive—they thrive.

♦Rob Donelson, Executive in Residence, Capacity Canada

Email: rob@capacitycanada.ca

The post Fundraising? “I Didn’t Sign Up for That.” appeared first on Capacity Canada.

Selling in a slow market? Yes, that’s still happening, even though our May figures were 27% below the 11 year average for sales volume, in part due to waning investor sentiment. A slow month or not, the usual factors are still very much in play in Kitchener, Waterloo and Cambridge: marriages and divorces, downsizing, moving nearer to family, and of course, climbing the property ladder.

With a balanced 4.0 months of inventory currently available across Waterloo Region, homes are still trading hands every single day and executing a successful sale follows a relatively straightforward path. If you are thinking of selling right now, here is the playbook you need to follow..

Control What You Can (Presentation is Everything)

Sellers, you need to get your property looking as good as you possibly can. In a slow market you’re competing against months of inventory on our local MLS.

Start by getting your home clean and spotless. Fix all those little things that have been on the to-do list for years. In some cases, painting and even relatively low-cost measures like new flooring or fresh landscaping might be necessary. An ideal presentation can require professional staging.

Double Down on Premium Marketing

Once these tasks are checked off you’ll want a very competent AV person to shoot stills and video. I like the camera so I’ll usually include a narrated video with yours truly introducing the property. These days a 3d rendering such as Matterport or iGUIDE is a given for larger or prestigious properties. Drones are great as well, but aren’t quite as important as the other media types.

Price It Right (Data Doesn’t Lie)

Now that your home is shipshape where do you price it? Do you have a price in mind? Is it accurate or way off the mark? Having this conversation with my sellers I really do try be as objective as possible. Data doesn’t really lie, does it? Using it to support a case for a particular price point removes much of the subjective feelings sellers often have about their homes.

One thing I’ve observed over a decade in the business is the fact that over-pricing kills activity quicker than you can blink. Buyers these days are cautious and well informed and have a far bit of selection to choose from. If your agent is good and thinks you should be priced lower that what you’d like he should provide lots of comparables for you to look at to help inform the process.

The Bottom Line

Ultimately, your home is a commodity (even though you love it) that will be actively compared with others on the local market. It isn’t personal, it’s just business.

It isn’t rocket science, either. If your home looks average, it will get an average price. And if you over-price you’re dead. But pricing it right, the better you can make your home look relative to its peers, the more money buyers will ultimately be willing to pay you!

Want to know what your home is worth in today’s Waterloo Region market?

Markets change, but strategy wins. Let’s sit down, look at the local data together, and build a plan to get your home sold. Contact me today for a complimentary market evaluation.

The post Selling in a Slow Market? Here’s How to Win in Waterloo Region appeared first on Andrew Shackleton.

A month back, I realized my AI usage was getting out of hand, and that was draining more than just my tokens. After juggling 5 tasks at a time, end of the workday, I would still feel *I* didn’t do anything. Because technically it wasn’t me who was doing the tasks. By outsourcing work, I had lost the ability to track my own progress. I was stuck with one question:

Am I still learning?

AI promised to make me twice as productive. It did. It also made me twice as exhausted. My workplace feels like a simulation. Everyone seems to know about some new AI capability, and it is becoming impossible to catch up. We are constantly chasing the next new AI capability, in the race to become faster and better. Irony is, by using AI, we know everything and nothing at the same time.

I cannot trust any message, email, or document for its authenticity because there’s no way to know whether it’s the expertise of the author or AI — and that scares me and leads me to fact-check everything meticulously because AI gets things “almost right”. It might increase speed, efficiency, and quality, but the mental fatigue has also increased.

The side effects of being “tech savvy” today are not limited to mental exhaustion. Studies indicate that excessive use of AI might result in cognitive atrophy. A study by MIT found that the control group using LLM for a given task had reduced neural connectivity, indicating a decline in learning skills.

Instead of moving towards a utopian tech-savvy world, we’ve entered a dystopian reality where we are racking up cognitive debt — a price we’ll pay tomorrow for the mental shortcuts we take today. I got so used to offloading tasks to AI and having someone just do stuff for me that I am convinced my patience has gone to shit. I am also convinced people using AI will not have the patience to wait in line for 20 mins after the next 20 months.

AI is going to transform our lives and jobs; there’s no running away from it. But we have the control to define its role in our lives. Here’s what I used to prevent cognitive debt from using AI:

If you want to finish a task and just hand it over, you can let AI do the heavy lifting. But if you want to be learning (and growing), you need to draw a line between thinking and implementation. AI can save you time by doing repeated grunt work, and you can use the saved time doing brainstorming, designing, and learning. AI should be a collaborator, not the sole contributor.

When you hand over an entire project to AI, you lose the narrative of your own project. Before you think of a prompt, sketch out your own design, map the milestones, and build a foundational framework. Use AI to execute your vision, not to invent it for you.

Don’t ask AI to build a masterpiece in one giant prompt. It will hallucinate. You will be frustrated. Instead, treat the process as a relay race. Let AI generate a base layer, save the progress, and manually build on top of it. It keeps you actively engaged in the design of the project.

With AI, there’s no natural stopping point. You can always refine one more time, ask one more follow-up, generate one more variation. This open-endedness is another unique brand of mental exhaustion. Tame your inner perfectionist. If an AI output is 80% there, stop prompting. Step in, grab the keyboard, and manually edit the rest to your liking.

My parents figured out college assignments without Google. Future generations won’t be able to imagine life without AI. The transformation is already here, and it’s not waiting for us to catch up. It is up to us how much of ourselves we offload to it.

In the race for efficiency, let’s make sure we don’t automate away our intelligence.

Originally published by author at avgupt.substack.com.

Adulting Era | Avishi | Substack

Productivity Paradox of using AI was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

♦

North York Arts (NYA) is a non-profit, charitable organization created to uplift and expand the arts across all seven wards of North York by investing in artists, inspiring community members, and collaborating with partners and businesses.

For 15 years, NYA has built a strong audience of more than 230,000 attendees and participants to arts events and programs in the region. We serve the broader public with a focus on youth, families, seniors, newcomer communities and Neighbourhood Improvement Areas as well as serving the arts community through local artists and arts organizations.

NYA is one of six Local Arts Service Organizations (LASOs) whose purpose is to deliver on the City of Toronto’s social, economic and cultural goals outside of the downtown core. As such, we collaborate with City Councillors, the Economic Development and Culture division, and various community stakeholders.

New Board members will be supported by current Board members to help ease the transition into this leadership role. Participation on the Board is voluntary and there is no remuneration for service. See below for detailed information on the roles and responsibilities for Board members.

The volunteer Board of Directors provides strategic leadership and governance, establishes policy, oversees the operations and financial performance of NYA and assesses the Board’s own effectiveness.

Our Board members serve on several committees, including Finance & Audit, Fundraising, Nominations & Governance, and Marketing.

The Nominations & Governance Committee is interested in adding three (3) new members for the following commitment:

• Ideally, a minimum of three 1-year terms, with the first term beginning in September 2026.
• Expected to attend 7 Board meetings each year, including the June Annual General Meeting.
• Able to commit the time and resources to serve on the Board and on one Board committee, and to represent NYA as requested.
• Expected time commitment is approx. 3-5 hours per month.

The Nominations & Governance Committee is particularly interested in candidates with the following knowledge and expertise who either live or work in the City of Toronto, ideally in North York:

• Human Resources
• Public relations, media, and communications.
• Arts & Culture sector: management/industry experience / strategic partnerships
• Fundraising and corporate sponsorship.

• Commitment to NYA’s Vision and Values and an appreciation for the arts.
• Personal commitment to devote the time necessary to perform the responsibilities of a Board and Committee member.
• Strong communication and collaborative skills.
• Previous non-profit board experience is an asset.

• Please submit a cover letter and your resume/CV by Sunday, June 21, 2026 to board@northyorkarts.org
• All applicants must submit a cover letter and resume/CV to be considered for the position.

• All cover letters and resume/CV’s will be reviewed by the Nominations & Governance Committee to be selected for an interview.
• The Committee will then make recommendations for each open position to the Board.
• The Board will review the recommendations and then motion for selection.

NYA aligns with the City of Toronto’s commitment to being an equal opportunity employer, dedicated to creating a workplace culture of inclusiveness that reflects the diverse residents that we serve.

We thank all applicants in advance, however only those selected for an interview will be contacted. Interviews may be conducted throughout the posting period. However, no offers will be made until after the application deadline.

The post NORTH YORK ARTS appeared first on Capacity Canada.

I mean their names are different but that could be either shame at each other's last name or could they be brothers from a different father? It's very difficult to understand when one is dealing with similar types of ignorant behaviours much less different ones. For example without reference to any evidence whether documentation, examination or cross-examination Justice Reilly in his 86 page decision found all seven of my witnesses to be unreliable and inaccurate on the stand. Justice Craig Parry on the other hand dismissed over fourty witnesses for the prosecution (all women) in the Jeffery Sloka case advising that their testimony was unreliable and sometimes worse. 

Well you have to give the award for brass and nerve and stupidity to Justice Craig Parry I guess. Also in my case Justice Robert Reilly dismissed both men and women whereas Justice Parry was more consistent in his gender dismissals. Oh but maybe that's because he doesn't like examining male genitals as much as he does female ones hence there weren't any male complainants or witnesses to his behaviour. Regardless I accuse Justice Reilly of being a piker and only second best in the stupidity and corruption games played in our courts here in Waterloo Region. Both of them are a#@*holes and who nominates and appoints these @#*holes to judgeships in the first place? It's politicians if you can believe it. No surprise there.

Today's K-W Record article by Luisa D'Amato (Pg. A3) refers to the rally organizer as stating that our justice system is one of the "...broken systems that deny our humanity." Truer words were never spoken. I have long stated that our justice system is tainted, biased and grossly user unfriendly for normal citizens. It is however a playground for the wealthy and entitled to reinforce their positions of wealth and power. It is generally beloved by school boards (WRDSB) and municipalities including Woolwich Township. Those bodies have no qualms about spending money on legal fees to your and my (taxpayers) last nickel.

Let us not also forget how our local courts embraced two of our local politicians after they both were caught in a series of errors, mistakes, on purposes? and behaviour contrary to the provincial legislation known as the Municipal Elections Act (MEA) back in 2015-2017.  In Mark Bauman's case the Motion restoring him to his council seat was given by a local judge "ex parte". Do you know what that means? The MEA ordered his removal from office for failing to file any Financial Reports after the 2014 municipal election much less about three elections prior to that. "Ex parte" means without any other party which means yours truly the complainant was not even advised by the courts or anyone that Mark was attending court to get his council seat back. As Rich Clausi later suggested, in sports, that would be akin to throwing the game by having the opposing team not allowed to attend the proceedings. Mayor Shantz also got off after among other tricks misstating to the Judge the timing of giving her "updated" Financial Report to me and some others.  I too was the complainant on that case. Her lawyer even threatened me prior to court that if I attended he would bring up the earlier Justice Robert Reilly decision against me. I attended on my own time and had to ask for permission to speak against Ms. Shantz's position which was grudgingly at best permitted albeit to no avail. Apparently, surprise surprise, sitting politicians (similar to police officers) are given huge leeway and the benefit of the doubt as a matter of course. Oh and her lawyer besides had actually tried to bluff and intimidate me to not attend court and give testimony. While I find that grossly unethical behaviour I don't know if it's illegal.    

Musy, S. L., Purtschert, R., Sturchio, N. C., Heraty, L. J., Mueller, P., Lantis, J., Bishof, M. N., Vockenhuber, C., Date, A., Mayer, B., & Yokochi, R. (2026). Diffusion-Controlled Solute and Isotope Transport in the Milk River Aquifer System, Alberta, Canada: Implications for Dating Old Groundwater. ACS Earth and Space Chemistry, 10(5), 1291–1309. doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.5c00397

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE.

“Numerical simulations implemented in HydroGeoSphere explicitly represent advection, dispersion, diffusion, and radioactive decay, and explore parameter uncertainty through Monte Carlo analyses. Comparison of observed and simulated tracer–tracer and tracer–distance relationships allows us to quantify diffusion-induced dilution of ³⁶Cl, evaluate the potential bias in ⁸¹Kr-derived residence times, and delineate the conditions under which each tracer yields robust age information. This combined observational–modeling framework enables us to (i) quantify diffusion-controlled solute exchange, (ii) reassess long-standing interpretations of ³⁶Cl systematics in the Milk River Aquifer, and (iii) evaluate the robustness of ⁸¹Kr as a chronometer for very old groundwater in regional aquifers affected by long-term diffusive exchange.”

Abstract Image.

We’re pleased to highlight this recent publication by Stephanie L. Musy and colleagues, which investigates how diffusion-controlled solute transport influences groundwater age interpretations in the Milk River Aquifer (MRA), a transboundary aquifer system spanning southern Alberta and northern Montana. The study combines multiple environmental tracers, including krypton-81 (⁸¹Kr), chlorine-36 (³⁶Cl), stable chlorine isotopes (³⁷Cl/³⁵Cl), and radiocarbon (¹⁴C), with HydroGeoSphere (HGS) simulations to better understand groundwater residence times and the processes controlling tracer distributions in old groundwater systems.

Determining the age of fossil groundwater is critical for managing non-renewable groundwater resources, particularly in semi-arid regions where recharge rates are low and groundwater withdrawals often exceed replenishment. Historically, groundwater age estimates in the Milk River Aquifer have relied heavily on chlorine-36 (³⁶Cl), but previous studies suggested that diffusion of chloride from surrounding shale aquitards may significantly influence tracer concentrations and bias age interpretations. While isotope measurements alone provided evidence of this process, a quantitative assessment of diffusion-controlled transport and its impact on groundwater dating remained unresolved.

To address these challenges, the researchers developed a two-dimensional HydroGeoSphere (HGS) model capable of simulating groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, radioactive decay, and isotope transport within the aquifer–aquitard system. The model incorporated newly collected isotope data and was used to evaluate how diffusive exchange between the aquifer and surrounding shale formations affects tracer behavior over timescales approaching one million years. Monte Carlo simulations were also performed to assess uncertainty and identify the most influential transport processes controlling groundwater age estimates.

Results demonstrated that chloride-rich water diffusing from adjacent shale aquitards is the dominant control on observed ³⁶Cl/³⁵Cl ratios throughout the aquifer. The simulations successfully reproduced the measured decline in ³⁶Cl/³⁵Cl ratios and the corresponding increase in stable chlorine isotope values (δ³⁷Cl) along regional groundwater flow paths. Importantly, the study found that most of the apparent age signal recorded by chlorine-36 reflects chloride addition through diffusion rather than radioactive decay. As a result, groundwater ages derived solely from ³⁶Cl may significantly overestimate actual residence times in systems affected by long-term aquitard exchange.

Fig. 6. Comparison of modeled and observed ³⁶Cl/Cl and ⁸¹Kr behavior in (a) activity–activity space and (b) apparent piston-flow age–age space. Observations include propagated analytical uncertainties. The blue dashed line represents the piston-flow reference corresponding to the diffusion-free simulation. The black dot-dashed line shows the extended model trend derived from the HGS ensemble simulations. In panel a, the ensemble mean relationship was extrapolated to lower activities using a log–log linear regression fitted to the simulated tracer activities. In panel b, a generalized additive model fitted in log–log space was used to represent the nonlinear relationship between apparent ages, and the resulting trend was converted to apparent ages using isotope-specific decay equations.

In contrast, krypton-81 (⁸¹1Kr) proved far less sensitive to diffusion-controlled transport processes. HydroGeoSphere simulations showed that while diffusion contributed substantially to changes in chlorine isotope systematics, its effect on⁸¹Kr concentrations was comparatively minor. This finding confirms that ⁸¹Kr provides a more robust and reliable tracer for dating fossil groundwater in the Milk River Aquifer and similar sedimentary basin systems where aquifer–aquitard exchange occurs over geological timescales.

HydroGeoSphere was essential to this research because it enabled the explicit simulation of coupled groundwater flow and isotope transport processes, including advection, diffusion, dispersion, and radioactive decay within a fully integrated framework. By linking field observations with process-based numerical modeling, the researchers were able to quantify the role of matrix diffusion, reconcile long-standing discrepancies between tracer-based and hydraulic age estimates, and improve understanding of groundwater evolution in one of North America’s most important fossil groundwater resources.

This work highlights the importance of integrated hydrologic and transport modeling when interpreting environmental tracer data and demonstrates how HydroGeoSphere can help improve groundwater age assessments in complex aquifer systems. The findings provide valuable guidance for managing long-lived groundwater resources and support the development of more reliable approaches for evaluating groundwater sustainability in sedimentary basins worldwide.

Abstract:

Krypton-81 (⁸¹Kr) and chlorine-36 (³⁶Cl) are among the few isotopic tracers capable of constraining groundwater residence times on 10⁵–10⁶ year timescales. In sedimentary aquifer systems bounded by low-permeability units, however, diffusive solute exchange can strongly modify tracer distributions and bias apparent ages derived from concentration ratios. In the transboundary Milk River Aquifer (MRA), progressive chloride enrichment caused by diffusion across shale aquitards complicates the interpretation of ³⁶Cl/Cl as a chronometer. Here, we combine new measurements of ⁸¹Kr, ³⁶Cl, stable chlorine isotopes (³⁷Cl/³⁵Cl)), and ¹⁴C with advection–diffusion transport modeling to quantify the importance of matrix diffusion on tracer systematics and inferred groundwater ages. The simulations reproduce the observed decrease in ³⁶Cl/Cl and concomitant increase in δ³⁷Cl along regional flow paths, demonstrating that diffusive influx of Cl-rich aquitard water dominates the evolution of the chlorine isotope system. In contrast, modeled and observed ⁸¹Kr activities show substantially lower sensitivity to diffusive exchange over the timescales considered. A comparison of simulated and measured tracer relationships indicates that, in the MRA, apparent ages derived from ³⁶Cl primarily reflect chloride addition rather than radioactive decay, whereas ⁸¹Kr provides a more robust and conservative chronometer for fossil groundwater. These results highlight the value of integrating stable and radioactive chlorine isotopes with noble gas dating and explicit transport modeling to disentangle decay from transport effects. The approach developed here provides a quantitative framework for interpreting multitracer data sets in regional aquifers affected by long-term diffusive exchange and has broader implications for assessing fossil groundwater resources in similar hydrogeological settings.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE.

On the third week of my internship, I noticed something strange.

Every morning, one intern from our batch was already online before everyone else.

By late evening, he was still active.

Whenever a manager asked for help, he immediately volunteered.

Whenever a teammate mentioned a problem, he jumped into the discussion.

His Slack status almost never turned idle.

At first, everyone admired him.

“He’s very dedicated.”

“Very proactive.”

“Very hardworking.”

And honestly, many of us felt pressured because of him.

Slowly, an invisible competition started among interns.

People began replying faster than necessary.

Some stayed online late just to appear committed.

Others started taking extra tasks even when their original work was unfinished.

Nobody said it openly, but everyone was trying to look valuable.

Including me.

One night, around 11:30 PM, I was still debugging a small issue that probably could have waited until morning.

I remember staring at the screen, exhausted but unwilling to stop.

Not because the work was urgent.

Not because anyone forced me.

But because I thought:

“If people see me working late, they will think I care more.”

That mindset quietly spreads among many early engineers.

Especially during internships.

Because internships feel like extended interviews.

Every meeting feels important.

Every message feels observable.

Every interaction feels like it might influence your future.

So interns start optimizing for visibility instead of sustainability.

They confuse:

• being constantly available with being dependable,
• looking stressed with being committed,
• and overworking with ownership.

But after a few weeks, reality started becoming visible.

The intern who worked the longest hours began missing details in tasks.

Another intern became unusually quiet during discussions because of exhaustion.

One person stopped asking questions entirely because they were mentally drained.

And interestingly, the interns most appreciated by managers were not the ones trying to look the busiest.

They were the ones who:

• communicated clearly,
• delivered consistently,
• stayed calm under pressure,
• and worked sustainably without creating chaos around themselves.

That was the first time many of us understood something important about corporate life:

Professional value is not measured by how exhausted you look.

It is measured by how reliable you remain over time.

If you are an intern or early-career engineer, remember this:

Every senior you admire today was once in your situation. He grew because he could manage his energy and time efficiently. Burnout is not proof of dedication. Sustainable reliability matters far more in the workplace.

If this article felt relatable, share it with someone entering corporate life for the first time.

And follow the ENGINEERING BEYOND CODE series for more lessons that engineering colleges rarely prepare you for.

The Silent Pressure of Looking “Smart” In Meetings

what-shocked-me-most-during-my-first-internship

why-some-interns-get-trusted-faster-than-others

5 reasons Why Interns Should Not Overwork Themselves To Impress Everyone was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The Moon-Sighting Committee of the Council of Shia Muslim Scholars of North America has announced that Tuesday, June 16, 2026, marks the first day of Muharram 1448 A.H. for all of North America. This follows verified naked-eye sightings of the crescent moon at sunset on Monday, June 15.

Key dates for this month include:

• June 17 (2 Muharram): Arrival of Imam Hussain (p) in Karbala.
• June 22 (7 Muharram): Water is cut off from Imam Hussain (p) and his companions.
• June 25 (10 Muharram): Day of Ashura.
• June 28 (13 Muharram): Burial of the martyrs of Karbala.
• July 10 (25 Muharram): Martyrdom of Imam Ali ibn Hussain (al-Sajjad) (p).

A terminal workspace with batteries included

Rust 33.7k 40 issues need help Updated Jun 16

That said let's not fool ourselves. The Doug Ford Conservative government has a proven track record of first class environmental degradation, exploitation and contempt all in favour of monied elites including developers and big money donors to the Conservative Party of Ontario. While there have been a number of "last straws" I guess the latest news in Saturday's K-W Record titled ""Fresh look " at water capacity required in Waterloo Region, province says" written by Bill Jackson has got my goat.

I believe that the province of Ontario should have long ago taken over the operation of the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) due to their long standing dishonesty to the public, incompetence, pettiness and corruption. Waterloo Region however have thrived generally speaking in the public's opinion because they are better at indoctrination and propaganda, not so much due to their actions. Generally they have proven better at selling bull*%it to the public than the WRDSB has. Also there have always been a few school Board trustees willing to speak out publicly whereas regional councillors generally have either been cowed or are fellow travellors with the majority. I do believe that there are some very good staff at the Region just as there are some very good teachers within the WRDSB. Unfortunately neither of those groups runs the show nor will ever be promoted to positions to do so. Corrupt organizations are very careful to promote their own like minded poofs.  

Regional councillor Mike Harris gives every indication of the worst attributes of a Conservative. It's all about benefiting the already wealthy at the expense of everyone and everything else.  Hard to believe that a true believer like himself was treated so shabbily years ago by the provincial Conservatives just in order to give a job to a procreating putz like Mike Harris Jr. Regardless regional councillor Mr. Harris wants to reduce the water supply resiliency factor from 20% to 10%. Of course he does so that local developers and builders can continue making obscene profits. Employment for the trades workers while an admirable goal is merely one of their excuses to hide behind. Meanwhile the Region (Ken Brothers)  have pompously advised the public that "The interim framework is a flexible, five year, risk-based approach ...and replaces the 20 per cent resiliency target, which could be as low as 12 per cent while system repairs and upgrades are underway, the region said."

Meanwhile staff advised that the new "framework" doesn't align with Mr. Harris's proposed resiliency target of 10 per cent. Wow talk about nit picking, rolling over while still pretending that the Region are making sure that there is enough water for the rest of us who have kept the Region financially afloat for many decades through our taxes. Just too bad if we, the vast majority of citizens run out of water as long as the big shot developers and builders continue to get richer. This decision is NOT in the public interest it is doing what both the Region and the province want which is to enrichen local, private interests who will continue to financially support Conservative politicians and ideology. 

What is 1-on-1 meetings?

They are designated conversations for managers to connect with their direct reports about their workloads, priorities, goals, challenges, feedback, and more. In general, these meetings occur every monthly/quartely or on a predictable schedule. It includes you and the manager, remotely or in person. It's typically informal, often overlooked, and underestimated.

For the first few years of my career, I treated my 1:1 like a second standup. I’d walk in with a list of what I shipped, recite it, answer “anything blocking you?” with a reflexive “nope,” and walk out feeling productive. Thirty minutes, gone. My manager felt informed, I felt diligent, and nothing of value ever changed.

It took me too long to see the obvious: the 1:1 is the only meeting on my calendar that’s actually about me, and I was using it to read out a list a Jira board could have shown faster.

Here’s the thing nobody tells you — what you should talk about in a 1:1 changes completely depending on where you are in your career. The questions that make a Junior look thoughtful make a Staff engineer look lost, and vice versa. So this is the IC track, level by level: what’s worth your 1 hour, and what’s quietly wasting them.

Your 1:1 is for: figuring out what you don’t know .

You’re new. The biggest risk to your growth isn’t that you’ll make mistakes — it’s that you’ll hide the things you’re confused about because you don’t want to look like you don’t belong. The 1:1 is the one private channel built for exactly that.

What to discuss:

• The blocker you’ve been too embarrassed to raise in standup. That bug you’ve quietly lost two days to — say it here. Your manager would rather spend ten minutes unsticking you than find out on Friday that the week vanished.
• The missing “why.” “I finished the ticket, but I don’t actually understand why we’re building this.” That’s not a dumb question — it’s the question that makes you faster at everything afterward.
• Patterns in your code review feedback. If you keep getting the same notes — write tests, smaller functions, clearer names — ask about the underlying pattern, not just the one comment. Fix the cause, not the symptom.
• An honest read on expectations. “Am I roughly where I should be at this point?” Most managers won’t volunteer it. Ask.

What to avoid:

• Don’t fake things or propose ideas without proper analysis.
• Don’t go looking for problems in your team or team members — if something is affecting your work, help your manager understand the situation and work toward a resolution, not a blame game.
• Don’t ask for a promotion you’re not ready for.
• Don’t pretend everything is fine when it isn’t — “all is well” is not a status update.

Don’t walk out of 1:1 without a clear understanding where your focus should be on next few months, pitch in the ideas you would be working. Give confidence to the manager that you are valuable resource to the team. The efforts you put in first few years would definitely shape your career and manager would be able to guide you on what your thinking and not what he wants you do it.

Your 1:1 is for: proving you can own things, not just complete them.

The idea here is to build trust with the manager that you ship features end-to-end and not just finish up some tasks and bring design/ideas to the team.

What to discuss:

• A direct ask for ownership. “I want to take the next feature start to finish. What would you need to see from me to be comfortable handing that over?”
• Cross-team friction. You’re starting to depend on other teams now. When one is blocking or ghosting you, surface it — your manager can often move things you can’t.
• Decisions you’re unsure about. “I’m leaning toward approach A over B. Can I walk you through it?” This sharpens your judgment and builds your manager’s trust in it at the same time.
• Visibility. Good work delivered, but it hasn’t come to anyone’s notice, which will not help you move your career ladder. If you shipped something that mattered, talk about how to make it seen — through demos, internal articles/documentation, etc.

What to avoid:

• Saying the same things you told in stand-ups.
• Waiting for opportunities to be handed to you.
• Avoiding the awkward conversations about slipping timelines.
• Don’t get too technical.

This is the level where you are not fresher nor senior but you believe in your potential and help the team grow along with you.

Your 1:1 is for: Impact beyond your team.

By now, you should be unblocking yourself. So the 1:1 stops being about your tasks and becomes about alignment, visibility, and the things you can see that your manager can’t.

What to discuss:

• Team-health signals. “Frequent build breakages are becoming a source of frustration for the Dev team and may be worth addressing.” You’re closer to the ground than your manager — you’re their early warning system.
• Technical-direction concerns, with a proposal attached. If you think the architecture is not good, raise it — not as a complaint, but as “here’s the risk, here’s what I’d do about it.” Framing the difference sets you apart from Juniors.
• Your path to Staff. “What would it actually take?” is a fair question now. If the answer is vague, that’s information too.
• Cross-functional relationships and what’s coming. How aligned are you with product and design? And ask about reorganization, staffing, or strategy shifts that’ll hit your work — you’ve earned the heads-up.

What to avoid:

• Overcommitting and having burn out later.
• Asking permission to do things you were assigned to do.
• Don’t get into technical implementation details.

At senior, you own certain high level responsibilities in the team, ownership of team and helping team members when they are stuck/unavailable to progress due to blockers.

Your 1:1 is for: Alignment on strategies and organizational influence.

Your scope isn’t a team anymore — it’s multiple teams, or the whole org. It will b driving changes and ensuring you are in right direction.

What to discuss:

• Organization alignment. “Based on what I have noticed in teams, I think we should prioritize X over Y — does that match where the company’s goals are heading?”
• Organizational hurdles. At this level, your blockers are political, resourcing, or misaligned incentives far more than they are code. Discuss it, as it won’t resolve itself.
• Your own influence effectiveness. “I’ve been advocating for this architectural change for three months, but it hasn’t gained traction. What might I be overlooking?” Sometimes it’s team dynamics, or it’s how you’re communicating things. Either way, you need to know.
• Engineering culture and succession. Beyond project delivery, highlight how you’re shaping engineering culture through hiring standards, code review practices, documentation quality, and technical leadership. Be prepared to discuss what’s working well and, importantly, who is growing into Staff-level responsibilities under your mentorship. If you remain the sole point of expertise in a critical area with no clear successor developing behind you, that’s an organizational risk that should be acknowledged and addressed rather than overlooked.

What to avoid:

• Waiting to be told what matters because you’re supposed to drive that change
• Individual technical directions that don’t align with organisation goals

At the Staff+ level, your impact is measured by how much you enable others to succeed. If your 1:1s focus only on your own work, you’re missing a key part of the role — mentoring, influencing, and creating leverage across the organization.

You’re now running 1:1s for your team, but you still need one with your own manager.

What to discuss:

• People problems: underperformance, interpersonal friction, quiet flight risks. This is easily half the job. Walk through your thinking before things escalate. Your manager has seen these patterns before; use that.
• Execution risks: Is everything on track? Try “we’re technically on schedule, but I’m worried about X.” Surface risk early enough to do something about it.
• Cross-team blockers: Some friction can’t be resolved at your level. If another team is slowing you down, or there’s organizational drag you can’t cut through, that’s what your manager is there for.
• Your own development: First-time managers: ask for feedback on your management, not just your output. “What could I have done differently in how I handled X?” You’re learning a new skill — treat it seriously.
• Organizational context: Budget shifts, strategy changes, headcount decisions — you need enough visibility to plan effectively. Ask for it.

What to avoid:

• Walking through every team issue in exhausting detail. Summarize, then go deep where it matters.
• Waiting until a problem is a full-blown crisis before mentioning it.
• Performing composure you don’t actually have.
• A common mistake new managers make is spending most of their upward 1:1 discussing challenges and frustrations. While it’s important to raise concerns, if that’s the focus of every meeting, you’re missing opportunities for growth. Come prepared with specific asks, seek guidance, and use the conversation to drive outcomes — not just surface problems.

And this is how we need to help Juniors, Mid-level, and with Seniors Engineers when they reach out to you.

With Junior engineers:

• Look beyond a simple “Any blockers?” question. Junior engineers often hesitate to raise challenges, so they focus on understanding their recent work and where progress became difficult.
• Measure growth, not just output. Completing tasks is important, but continuous learning and skill development are what drive long-term success.
• Ensure they understand the bigger picture. If they can’t explain the purpose or impact of their work, they likely need more context about how it connects to team and business goals.

With Mid-level engineers

• With mid-level engineers, focus on whether they’re ready to take on more ownership — and if not, what’s holding them back, whether it’s confidence, comfort zones, or unclear expectations.
• Pay attention to how they manage cross-team interactions, since organizational friction often appears at this stage but isn’t always raised proactively.
• Look for signs they’re starting to mentor others; if not, it’s a good point to encourage them to begin.

With Senior engineers:

• What are they noticing that you might be missing? Senior engineers are often closest to the ground reality, so it helps to ask about team morale and hidden technical debt or concerns.
• Are they operating sustainably? Seniors frequently take on disproportionate responsibility, so it’s important to check for burnout and whether their workload is manageable long-term.
• What are their next career aspirations — Staff, management, or deeper technical specialization? If it’s unclear, make it a direct conversation topic.

With Staff engineers:
Are their initiatives actually landing? Staff engineers can get stuck when their influence doesn’t translate into real execution — help them understand what’s blocking impact.

• Are they still close to the work? It’s easy to drift into only high-level design, so ensure they remain connected to delivery, not just guidance.
• Are they actively developing others? If they remain the sole expert without transferring knowledge, it creates a long-term dependency risk.

Your 1:1 with your manager: Org strategy, not execution details

You’re managing managers now. Your scope is the whole department. Your 1:1 with your manager should reflect that — it’s about org design, strategic alignment, and making sure your leadership layer is actually working.

What to discuss:

• Maintain a clear view of organizational health by identifying struggling teams, leadership gaps, and emerging risks before they become visible problems.
• Discuss resource allocation in terms of tradeoffs and recommendations. Frame challenges with potential solutions rather than simply highlighting constraints.
• Focus on leadership development by identifying who is ready for greater responsibility, who needs support to grow, and whether there is a strong succession pipeline in place.
• Surface areas of strategic misalignment, especially when teams, functions, or leadership groups are working toward conflicting priorities.
• Actively seek feedback on your own effectiveness. As you move higher in the organization, candid feedback becomes less frequent, making it important to ask directly for perspectives you may be missing.

What to avoid:

• Getting pulled into details that should be owned by your managers; focus on enabling them rather than doing the work for them.
• Don’t postpone difficult conversations about team structure, organizational changes, or leadership challenges that need attention.
• Recognize and navigate organizational dynamics instead of pretending they don’t exist; influence is part of the role.
• Be intentional with your 1:1s. As leaders become more senior, there’s often an assumption that someone else will drive the conversation. In practice, the higher you go, the more ownership you should take in shaping the agenda and ensuring the most important topics are discussed.

What to check with your managers who report to you
What to explore with your managers

• Look beyond high-level team health updates. Use skip-level conversations to validate your understanding and identify gaps between what individual contributors experience and what is being reported.
• Discuss specific team members and their growth. Asking about individuals by name often leads to more concrete insights about performance, development, and future potential.
• Understand retention risks. Encourage managers to share their perspective on who may be disengaged or considering a move, so potential issues can be addressed proactively rather than reactively.

Delivery status

• Go beyond status updates and actively uncover risks. Ask what concerns haven’t been raised yet and where confidence may be lower than it appears.
• Challenge optimistic timelines by exploring potential failure modes and assumptions. Strong plans should be able to withstand scrutiny and risk analysis.
• Pay close attention to cross-team dependencies. Delays and execution issues often originate from factors outside a team’s direct control, making them important to identify and manage early.

With managers:

• Ask what insights they are gaining about their team. Effective managers should be able to articulate what they are learning about individual growth, team dynamics, and emerging challenges.
• Assess how well they are delegating. New managers often take on too much themselves instead of empowering others and distributing ownership.
• Understand how they handle difficult conversations, including performance concerns, missed expectations, and constructive feedback. Avoidance in these areas is often a key coaching opportunity.
• What cross-team friction are they picking up? They’re closer to day-to-day reality than you are. Get their unfiltered read.
• What would they change if it were up to them? This often surfaces real frustrations — and occasionally, genuinely good ideas.
• Who’s ready for more? Ask specifically who on their team is ready to be stretched, who’s close to promotion, and who needs a new challenge. If they can’t answer, talent development isn’t actually happening.

• Come prepared with topics to discuss rather than relying on spontaneous conversation.
• Take ownership of the agenda; if your manager always drives it, you’re being passive about your own growth.
• Be honest about challenges, concerns, and opportunities — issues can’t be addressed if they aren’t surfaced.
• Follow up on previous discussions and action items to maintain momentum and accountability.
• Respect the time; if there’s genuinely nothing meaningful to discuss, give the time back rather than forcing the conversation.

These habits have definitely helped my 1:1 with my manager better. Whenever something noteworthy happens — a challenge, a success, a concern, or a decision I’m unsure about — take a note of it.
The most valuable 1:1s feel like collaborative problem-solving, focused on what matters most at that stage of your career.
The least effective ones are filled with vague updates and missed opportunities to discuss issues that later become bigger problems.

You get out of a 1:1 what you put into it. Bring a meaningful topic, ask a question you’ve been avoiding, or share something that genuinely matters. Since the time is already on the calendar, make it count.

Thank you for reading this article. Please provide your valuable suggestions/ feedback.

• Clap and Share if you liked the content.
• 📰 Read more content on my Medium (on Java Developer interview questions)
• 🔔 Follow me on: LinkedIn
• Reach out to me for resume and interview preparation. I can guide how to crack EU Developer interviews. Contact me on topmate.

Please find my other helpful articles on Java Developer interview questions.

Following are some of the frequently asked Java 8 Interview Questions

Frequently Asked Java Programs

Dear Readers, these are the commonly asked Java programs to check your ability in writing the logic.

SpringBoot Interview Questions | Medium

Rest and Microservices Interview Questions| Medium

Spring Boot tutorial | Medium

Must-know-coding-programs-for-faang-companies| Medium

Multithreading top interview questions

Complete Guide to Effective 1:1 Meetings was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

During a recent interview with NBC’s Kristen Welker, President Trump referred to her as “darling” after she challenged him on election fraud claims. BBC News

Darling.

While this example comes from politics, similar language shows up in workplaces all too often.

In We Need to Talk About Using Pet Names for Women at Work, Amy Diehl, PhD, and Leanne Dzubinski, PhD, explain that pet names like “darling,” “sweetheart,” “honey,” and “dear” aren’t cute or funny. They’re unprofessional and often sexist.

More importantly, they can undermine a woman’s credibility and authority. As one mathematician whose male bosses refer to her as “sweetie” and “honey” commented,

“It’s like they are intimidated by my abilities and so to put me in my place they need to use demoralizing pet names to make me seem not as competent.”

Instead of pet names, let’s just use someone’s actual name. It’s a simple way to show respect and reinforce that everyone belongs.

Share on Instagram, LinkedIn, or YouTube.

Some employees know exactly what it takes to get promoted, while others are left trying to decode the process.

And research suggests that transparency matters.

In Coqual’s report, Being Black in Corporate America: An Intersectional Exploration, researchers found that when organizations are transparent about promotions, Black women are more than three times as likely to report satisfaction with their advancement and intend to stay.

In a related study, researchers at Harvard Business School (HBS) found that when women received clear information about the qualifications needed for a role, the share of women who applied jumped from 6% to 29%.

As Siri Chilazi explained:

“People with less access to informal networks, fewer mentors in senior roles, and less visibility into how decisions get made tend to underestimate what they’ve already accomplished, and overestimate what’s still required. So they wait, or they don’t put their hand up at all.”

As a result, many qualified people never put themselves forward.

If your organization isn’t already telling employees what the bar is for promotions, consider what you can do to change that. Document the requirements, timelines, expectations, and responsibilities for each level.

Willie King, who is a deaf person, wrote about his experience at a large home improvement store when everyone suddenly stopped moving. He didn’t know why, so he kept walking.

Later, he learned that the store pauses at 3pm on Memorial Day for a nationwide moment of silence to honor fallen service members. Had he known, he would have stopped, too. But because the announcement was made only over the speakers, he never received the message.

As my friend Meryl Evans commented, a best practice is always to have at least two ways to communicate information.

In a public setting, that might mean:

• Dimming the lights before an announcement.
• Posting signage near entrances.
• Displaying messages on screens.

Online, it could mean:

• Adding alt text to images.
• Including captions and transcripts for videos.
• Sharing key information in both visual and written formats.

Whenever possible, communicate important information in at least two ways. More people will receive the message — and feel included as a result.

With Juneteenth approaching, I’m reminded of a correction I received from newsletter subscribers a few years ago.

I had written about the holiday and used the word slaves.

Several readers reached out to suggest a different term: enslaved people.

Their reasoning stuck with me. By using enslaved people, we put more of an emphasis on what was done to them, separating their circumstances from their identity.

I’ve used enslaved people ever since.

I’m grateful to those subscribers for taking the time to share this feedback. It’s a reminder that language evolves, and that being a better ally often means being willing to learn, adjust, and do better when we know better.

If you’d like to learn more about this terminology, check out Slave or Enslaved Person.

Newsletter subscriber Dave Buchthal told me about a conversation sparked by an article about gender bias where people rated identical résumés, with only the name changed. Some had Emily Clarke, others had James Clarke.

One of Buchthal’s male coworkers immediately searched for flaws in the research, dismissing its validity without even reading about the study.

Buchthal noticed how easy it can be to become defensive when discrimination is discussed, especially if we identify with the “in-group.” He wrote,

“For me, the lesson is clear — if my first reaction to reading a news story is to poke holes in the details, it’s time to stop and reflect on why I’m being so reactive. And if I start thinking that I’m smarter than someone without even reading their research, then perhaps I need to sit quietly on that until I can better manage my own emotional reactions.”

Thank you 🙏.

That’s all for this week. I’m glad you’re on this journey with me,

Karen Catlin (she/her), Author of the Better Allies® book series

Copyright © 2026 Karen Catlin. All rights reserved.

Together, we can make a difference with the Better Allies® approach.

• Say thanks to Karen and buy her a coffee ☕ (Need a receipt for educational reimbursement? Reply to this email, and we’ll take care of it.)
• Sponsor an edition of this newsletter
• Follow @BetterAllies on Instagram, Medium, or YouTube. Or follow Karen Catlin on LinkedIn
• Read the Better Allies books
• Tell someone about these resources

Don’t Use Pet Names for Women at Work, and Other Actions for Allies was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

♦

GUELPH - The Panthers have yet to taste victory in the month of June.

The sixth straight defeat was a close battle, losing in Guelph 7-6 Saturday afternoon on a day where Kitchener had a three-run lead.

Down 3-0, Josh Williams hit a home run that bounced off the top of the left field fence and out to give Kitchener some life in the fifth. 

Petey Kiefer hit an RBI single to tie it later in the inning.

The hits continued into the seventh, as the Panthers tacked on three more runs.

In that inning, the Panthers were credited with seven stolen bases, including some double steals that helped them score a couple runs.

But the newest Panther Ernesto Punales had a debut to forget as he gave up four runs in the seventh that put Guelph over the top for good.

Owen MacNeil went four innings in the start and registered the no decision. He gave up three runs (two earned) on six hits, struck out seven and walked four.

Andrew Case was credited with the win, going 1.2 innings and gave up one hit.

Kitchener drops to 5-9 on the year, while Guelph improves to 6-6.

The two teams are scheduled to meet again in Kitchener Sunday at 2 p.m., but there is some threatening weather moving in. Keep an eye on Kitchener's social media for the latest on the status of Sunday's game.

After Sunday, Kitchener hosts Brantford on Thursday at 7:05 p.m.

GET YOUR TICKETS NOW and #PackTheJack!

Yesterday and today I've sent two e-mails out to a variety of twits, twats, shits and shats. I have mostly avoided calling them by those names out of an overabundance of the milk of human kindness. It's really not that hard to do but the practice is not a good one to rely on. I don't refer to people as I have in the first sentence just because they have an honest disagreement with me regarding the facts. It's those #$%*&^ who know perfectly well what the facts are but insist upon denying them not to persuade myself but others less informed. 

Sebastian has been trying to get some misconceptions, misrepresentations and logical inconsistencies straightened out at TRAC. His concerns and points are well thought out and appropriate and need to be more seriously addressed than past ones have been. Hence my response sent to a couple of Lanxess and TRAC spokespersons plus others. My response opens a can of worms that Lanxess and predecessor companies have long avoided. They include dissolved chlorobenzene in the Bedrock Aquifer alongside admitted NDMA . They also include free phase DNAPL in the Bedrock Aquifer whether chlorobenzene or other chlorinated solvents or compounds such as DDT and dioxins/Furans. 

All the guilty parties have known bad news about our various aquifers for decades that they have not shared with the public. I believe that if the true extent of the contamination had been honestly communicated that the second class cleanup by Uniroyal Chemical and successors would never have been allowed or permitted. Plain, old fashioned lying has been the rule for decades and we are now seeing the results of that. Uniroyal Chemical and Crompton, Chemtura and Lanxess have all knowingly misinformed the public as to the known facts. First they obliterated our drinking water then they lied to us repeatedly about it.    

♦

KITCHENER - Nothing went right for the Kitchener Panthers.

On a rare Friday night home game, Kitchener gave up 13 runs on 18 hits as the Maple Leafs rolled to a 13-4 win at Jack Couch Park.

Both marks were season highs for Toronto, who scored in seven of the nine innings.

Kitchener could not get out of the gate against Nick Veselinovic, who gave up four hits and two runs in six innings for the win. He struck out five and walked three.

The Panthers had base runners in most innings, but Toronto shut them down.

Malik Williams hit a two-run moonshot in the seventh to give Kitchener some life, but the game was already well in hand.

Evan Elliott surrendered seven runs on 12 hits in four innings and took the loss.

Kitchener has now lost five straight and dropped to 5-8 on the season. Toronto improved to 3-7.

The Panthers will look to right the ship in a home-and-home weekend series with Guelph.

The two meet at Hastings Stadium Saturday afternoon at 2 p.m. before heading to Kitchener for a Sunday afternoon showdown at 2 p.m.

GET YOUR TICKETS NOW and #PackTheJack!

Child Care Now, Canada’s national child care advocacy association, is seeking a dynamic and experienced Executive Director (ED) to lead the organization in its next phase of growth and impact on the development of a publicly funded and managed universal and primarily not-for-profit system of child care in Canada.

Reporting to and working closely with a volunteer Board of Directors elected from across Canada, the ED is responsible for the overall leadership, strategic direction, and management of the organization. The ED serves as the primary spokesperson for Child Care Now and plays a central role in advancing its mission through effective advocacy, fundraising, coalition-building, and active ongoing engagement with the child care sector, policy-makers, and the public.

It is preferred that the Executive Director live in or close to Ottawa, Ontario.

The annual salary range is $110,000 – $120,000.

Child Care Now strives to be a family-friendly organization by providing:

• Flexible work schedule (to be determined in consultation with the Board of Directors),
• Telework support,
• An employer-paid single or family extended benefit plan,
• Generous family leave, vacation entitlements, and other time off.

The Hiring Committee welcomes applicants who may wish to assume this role on a term or contract basis for at least two years.

Expected start date by September 30, 2026 (ideally by September 15, 2026)

Founded in 1982, Child Care Now is Canada’s non-partisan national child care advocacy association. As a membership-based organization of individuals and organizations across the country, Child Care Now leads and coordinates pan-Canadian advocacy for a publicly funded and publicly managed, high-quality, universally accessible, not-for-profit system of early learning and child care for children from birth to age 12. Working in partnership with the many actors in Canada’s child care sector and with a broad cross-section of allied organizations, Child Care Now advances public policy solutions that strengthen families, promote gender equity, and build inclusive communities.

• Design and execute national advocacy strategies to advance a universal child care system
• Build and maintain strong relationships with federal, provincial, and territorial governments
• Advance strategic policy proposals and represent the organization in high-level policy discussions

• Serve as the public spokesperson for the organization
• Lead media relations, public communications, and messaging strategies
• Represent Child Care Now at conferences, events, and in national forums

• Lead fundraising strategies, including grants, partnerships, and donor development
• Ensure financial sustainability and responsible resource management

• Strengthen and expand a diverse and broad coalition of supporters
• Engage and grow the organization’s membership base
• Foster strong relationships with partner organizations and stakeholders

• Lead the development and implementation of organizational strategic plans
• Ensure strong governance practices in collaboration with the Board of Directors
• Ensure compliance with all legal, financial, and regulatory obligations

• Lead, support, and manage a small, distributed team across Canada
• Promote a collaborative, inclusive, and high-performing organizational culture

• Significant experience in advocacy, ideally at a national level
• Demonstrated expertise in policy-maker relations and public policy development
• Strong background in early learning and child care policy and related social and economic policy, as well as feminist and intersectional analysis
• Experience in organizational leadership, including managing staff and working with a Board

• Exceptional written and verbal communication skills, including public speaking
• Strong media relations and public engagement skills
• Proven ability to design and lead effective advocacy campaigns
• Sills in fundraising and organizational sustainability
• Ability to work with membership-based organizations and coalitions
• Abilities in organizational administration and governance

• French language proficiency

Applicants must send a covering letter with a resumé to info@childcarenow.ca by June 30, 2026 (please put “Executive Director Application” in the subject line).

The post Child Care Now appeared first on Capacity Canada.

Next Thursday at 6 pm. is a social get together for the TRAC members. Their two page Agenda is out combined with a total of 764 pages which is grotesquely swollen even for these long winded, short on action pack of potential scapegoats and patsies. This 764 pages includes the Minutes of the last meeting, two monthly Progress Reports and allegedly a Data Summary for the Canagagigue Creek by some buddy of the five minute woman, Hadley Stamm (Lanxess). Finally there is the 2025 Lanxess Bio-Monitoring Report.

The following Agenda Items are those dealing with (sort of) the failed (by agreement of all) 2028 mandated deadline  to clean up the Elmira Aquifers. They include Items # 5, 5.1, 6, 7.2, 8.4  . Of course none of these Items will include the honest reasons for the total failure nor will they present any mea culpas (my bad), apologies or serious last ditch magic bullets to grasp victory from the jaws of defeat. In fact I would suggest that the old joke about pulling a Richard Nixon by grasping defeat from the jaws of victory (aka "Watergate") is more appropriate. 

In the case of the Elmira Water Crisis all parties publicly proclaimed during 1990-92 that there would a Cadillac cleanup of the Elmira Aquifers and of Elmira. They also suggested that the Creek would be properly addressed as well.  It was all lies but with any support whatsoever from any of our authorities it had enough public support and momentum to demand appropriate behaviour. Instead all our authorities including the Region of Waterloo were more concerned with getting their initial costs covered by either Uniroyal Chemical or the province of Ontario. Hence they rolled over like floor wetting puppies after they received money for lab costs, some legal costs and a water pipeline from Waterloo/St. Jacobs and a few other short term expenses.  Uniroyal already had the Ontario Ministry of Environment's credibility in a headlock due to their feeble and incompetent monitoring and supervision for decades. 

Currently Lanxess, Woolwich Township, MECP, Waterloo Region are working very hard to continue lying and deceiving the public regarding their failure to restore our drinking water. It is a multi pronged offensive that is doomed to failure albeit they will certainly extend the mandated deadline by twenty, thirty, fourty or fifty more years so that eventually they can claim victory. Of course this "victory" will end up after generations  of Elmira and Woolwich residents have passed on. I was fourty years old when this crisis hit and I'm now seventy-six. Literally my kids will be elderly before Lanxess and fellow travellors achieve what could have and should have been achieved by now or within a year or two.

Unless of course this next generation let these professional liars continue their games and gamesmanship at our and the environment's expense. Polluter Pays is a sad joke. Maybe the next generation will feel sorry for these twits . Their lies have doomed our local water supply and the Creek but maybe  this next generation will tell them forget it, it's O.K. Don't even bother continuing going through the motions. 

Most of the boards we work with are not dysfunctional in any obvious way. Meetings start on time. Packages get read. Votes are usually unanimous. The chair is warm, the ED is competent, and everyone leaves feeling the organization is in good hands.

And yet, the same issues keep showing up. Succession planning is flagged as a priority at three AGMs in a row, and nothing is ever written down. The DEI statement has been approved, but the composition of the board looks much the same. The strategic plan is referenced in grant applications and almost nowhere else. A hard question gets raised, the chair thoughtfully parks it for next time, and next time doesn’t come.

This isn’t governance failure in the way the sector usually talks about it. It’s something quieter.

Here is what we see most often in Canadian nonprofit boards, and what we’d name first if someone asked us where leaders repeatedly get stuck:

There is a difference between the governance a board performs and the governance a board practices, and most boards don’t notice when they’ve drifted from one into the other.

Performed governance looks like the right things happening. Packages are circulated, motions are moved and seconded, strategic plans are adopted, committees file their reports. On paper, everything is in order. Practiced governance is something else, the board actually wrestling with a real choice, a decision that looks different because the board was in the room, a director saying the thing that has been quietly worrying them and the board taking it seriously enough to change course.

Most boards do both. The question is the ratio. Over time, the reflexes that build a strong board culture, respect, collegiality, care for one another, can quietly tilt that ratio toward performance. Direct disagreement starts to feel like a breach of trust. “Respectful” slides into “agreeable.” An unspoken concern gets handled through a text to a colleague rather than a question in the room. None of this is wrong on its face. But the habits that make a board feel healthy can also be the ones that keep it from being effective.

When a board drifts toward performance, it shows up in moments that are easy to miss from the outside.

The finance chair presents a budget showing a material drop in earned revenue. There is a pause. Someone asks a clarifying question about the catering line. No one asks what the drop means for reserves, or what happens if next year looks like this one.

A newer director raises a real question about whether the flagship program still serves the population it was built for. There is a longer pause. The chair thanks them thoughtfully and says, “Let’s park that for next time.” Next time, it’s not on the agenda.

The executive committee has a Friday coffee. By Monday, three items are effectively decided. They come to the full board as recommendations. Everyone votes yes, because voting no would feel like not trusting the colleagues who spent their own time on it.

None of this is malice. Most of it is genuine care. But the cumulative effect is a board that looks like it is governing and isn’t quite, where the hard things stay un-decided and the easy things look like progress.

Two places, mostly.

The first is mistaking agreement for alignment. When no one disagrees out loud, it’s easy to assume the board is aligned. Often it isn’t, the board has simply avoided the conversation that would reveal otherwise. Real alignment is something a board earns by working through disagreement, not something it inherits by avoiding it.

The second is substituting a statement for a decision. Approving a values statement, a DEI commitment, or a succession framework can feel like action, particularly when the document is well-written. The document does matter. But the test of whether a board has actually moved is whether anything about how it makes decisions looks different six months later. Most of the time, it doesn’t, not because the board didn’t mean it, but because approving a statement is a performance, and living differently because of it is a practice.

When was the last time your board genuinely disagreed, out loud, with names attached, and stayed in the room?

Not a polite difference of opinion that was quickly smoothed over. An actual moment of two directors seeing something differently, saying so, and the board working through it together until a real decision was made.

If it’s hard to think of one, that’s worth noticing.

The healthiest boards aren’t the quietest ones. They’re the ones that have learned to disagree well, where the chair makes space for the hard question rather than parking it, and where directors trust each other enough to risk being wrong in front of each other.

That kind of board culture isn’t built by policy. It’s built by practice, over time, and often with some honest outside reflection along the way, not to fix the board, but to name what the board already half-knows, and to make the uncomfortable conversation feel a little safer to have.

What does your organization need to move from performance to practice? Visit this page to see how Capacity Canada can help!

Written By:

♦

Claudia Sighomnou, Executive in Residence, Capacity Canada

Email: claudiasighomnou@capacitycanada.ca

The post The Governance We Perform, and the Governance We Practice appeared first on Capacity Canada.

A GNU screen style terminal multiplexer built on libghostty.

Zig 646 Updated Jun 16