we cannot eat applause. and we cannot pay rent with compliments.

 we cannot eat applause👏👏👏👏

and we cannot pay rent 🏠🏡🏚🏕😬🤦‍♀️with compliments.

Mark Carney's $4-billion announcement about Canadian culture sounds impressive. The titles are impressive, too.

The Canada Creative Credit. The Productivity Mega Deduction.

But I want to talk about what this looks like from the other side of the paintbrush.

I am an independent artist. I've been creating, exhibiting, painting murals, photographing, blogging and documenting my work for decades.

And I have a very different perspective on what it takes to make a living as an artist.

The proposed Canada Creative Credit would provide tax relief on up to $45,000 of qualifying annual net business income from original creative artistic work. It is not a $45,000 payment to artists, and the government still has to consult on the details.

That distinction matters enormously.

A tax credit does not create a customer.

It doesn't convince someone to buy an original painting instead of a cheap print. It doesn't make a business owner pay an independent artist fairly. It doesn't provide a studio, a gallery, a place to exhibit, or a home in which to make art.

And what happens when artists are already struggling to sell their work?

I know what that looks like.

I've had family members who never bought my art. I've had friends buy some of my best paintings for very little. I've sold work that I loved, only to find myself without the original pieces I needed to photograph, exhibit and promote my next collection.

I've watched businesses appreciate artwork while expecting artists to practically give it away.

So where exactly is the market that is supposed to support us?

And there is another concern.

When a government introduces a tax measure, there will inevitably be questions about eligibility, verification and possible abuse. But I don't want legitimate independent artists treated as suspects because somebody somewhere might exploit a program.

Don't build a system that makes working artists jump through hoops, then blame the artists when the system needs policing.

We need transparent rules, sensible safeguards and respect for the people actually doing the creative work.

Carney talks about artists making a living from their art. I would love to see that happen.

But here's what I would like him to understand:

• We need affordable places to live.
• We need affordable studios and working spaces.
• We need galleries and exhibition opportunities.
• We need businesses and institutions that purchase original Canadian art at fair prices.
• We need better access to customers.
• We need protection for independent creators and their original work.
• We need people to understand that art is labour, not a hobby that should always be donated.

And please remember that not every artist has a gallery, a manager, a commercial studio, wealthy clients or family money behind them.

Some of us are doing everything ourselves.

I have spent years creating original artwork, murals, photography, online projects and thousands of blog posts. I have built an audience without advertising.

I know what it takes to create. I also know what it takes to try to sell that creation.

A tax deduction doesn't sell a painting. A tax credit doesn't put dinner on the table if nobody buys the work.

I don't want another announcement telling us how valuable Canadian culture is.

I want a country where Canadian artists can actually afford to participate in the culture they help create.

Carney, you have the numbers. But have you listened to the artists who are trying to survive between those numbers?

Because we cannot eat applause.

And we cannot pay rent with compliments.

Who actually benefits when governments announce billions for the creative economy?

1.If art is so valuable to our national identity, why are so many artists struggling to afford basic necessities?

2. Can a tax credit create a market where people simply aren't buying original artwork?

3. Who actually benefits when governments announce billions for the creative economy?

4. Why do we celebrate artists after they become successful but rarely support them while they're struggling?

5. When did we decide that artists should be grateful for exposure instead of being paid for their labour?

6. How many paintings, songs, photographs, books and creative projects have disappeared because their creators couldn't afford to continue?

7. Should independent artists have to become business administrators, marketers and accountants just to qualify for support?

8. What responsibility do businesses, institutions and individuals have to support the artists whose work enriches their communities?

9. How can we protect legitimate artists from exploitation without creating systems that make it harder for them to earn a living?

10. If we cannot afford to house, feed and fairly compensate the people creating Canadian culture, what exactly are we investing in?

---

#SupportLivingArtists #CanadianArtists #ArtIsWork #PayArtistsFairly #IndependentArtists #CanadianCulture #CreativeEconomy #OriginalArt #ArtistsNeedHomes #ArtMatters

mexico, memories, money and the things we take home

 mexico, memories, money and the things we take home

November 14 – International Day against Illicit Trafficking in Cultural Property

Today is the International Day against Illicit Trafficking in Cultural Property.

Theft, looting and the illegal trade in cultural objects happen in countries all over the world. Communities lose pieces of their history, identity and heritage when objects are taken from their rightful places and sold elsewhere.

It is worth thinking about, especially when you've spent decades travelling, as I have.

When I first started going to Mexico, back in the late 1980s, I met a man from California. He was considerably older than me, but I really liked him.

I believe that, in his earlier days, he made some of his money buying and selling Mexican artifacts.

At the time, I don't remember people giving much thought to where things came from. There were plenty of tourist markets selling things described as antiques, reproductions and traditional Mexican crafts. There were also fakes.

But there's a difference between buying a locally made souvenir, buying a reproduction and buying an authentic cultural object that may have been stolen, looted or illegally removed from its country.

That distinction matters.

Anyway, life took some difficult turns for him. He had a wife who became ill with malaria and died while he was away. He eventually returned to the United States, but apparently wasn't doing very well. I suspect drinking had become a problem. His family encouraged him to return to Mexico.

By the time I knew him, he had a travel agency and exchanged money for visitors.

That was actually a huge help.

Younger travellers probably have no idea what travelling was like before debit cards, online banking and ATMs everywhere.

We carried traveller's cheques. These were prepaid paper cheques that you could exchange for local currency at banks, hotels or exchange offices. You bought them before leaving home, kept track of them, and signed them when cashing them. It was another thing to worry about while travelling!

Eventually, he became quite successful.

He had a beautiful house, and I was fortunate enough to stay there for a while. He was also involved in selling and renting some very expensive homes in Bucerías, near Puerto Vallarta.

I watched that little place change over the years.

What had once felt like a relatively quiet, little-known coastal community became a much busier tourist destination. Million-dollar homes, retirement properties, visitors and more development.

Older timers everywhere. Almost a retirement village compared with the Zipolite I knew.

And speaking of Zipolite...

There was a time when I was travelling all over Mexico, partly trying to get over this man. Long story short, that's how I ended up seeing so much of the country!

He eventually married a Mexican woman and had a child. I heard a few years ago that he had passed away. I don't know exactly when or what happened.

He also took me into the mountains for a few days, to Santa María del Oro.

That was an interesting trip, although not exactly a romantic adventure. He was unwell with amoebas, taking medication and sleeping much of the time. On our first day, someone drowned in the lake.

And then there were my green contact lenses.

We went into a little store, and I noticed people whispering and pointing. I was already a little nervous because we were so far up in the mountains.

I couldn't figure out what was happening.

He finally said, "It's your eyes. Your green eyes. They probably haven't seen that before."

Ohhhhh!

One of those little travel memories that stays with you.

Years later, I returned to Mexico with my child. I would have been around 46, and my child was six. We were finishing a big journey around the country, ending in Bucerías.

I remember thinking I was going to lose it.

Music playing everywhere. Everywhere you went, it felt like being inside a supermarket.

We had just come from the freedom of Zipolite, where we had been running around barefoot, sometimes naked or half-dressed, listening to music from all over the world.

We weren't exactly prepared to fit neatly back into Bucerías, never mind Vancouver!

And I repeated that recipe for adventure with my child at six, seven, ten and fifteen.

Those experiences became part of our lives.

But back to today's subject.

Travelling changes how you see things. It also makes you think about what happens when places become popular, when money arrives, when land changes hands and when the things that belong to a community become commodities for someone else's enjoyment or profit.

Cultural heritage isn't just something sitting behind glass in a museum.

It belongs to people. It belongs to communities, to Indigenous peoples, to families and to generations who came before us.

An archaeological object is not simply a pretty thing to put on a shelf. It can carry information about an entire civilization, a community's traditions and a history that cannot be replaced.

And just because something is offered for sale doesn't mean it should be bought.

UNESCO's 1970 Convention provides an international framework for preventing the illegal import, export and transfer of cultural property, and for helping return stolen objects to their countries of origin.

Perhaps the most important lesson is to ask questions before buying.

Where did it come from? Who did it belong to? Was it legally obtained? And who benefits from the sale?

I've seen Mexico change over nearly four decades. I've met people, fallen in love, travelled, made mistakes, learned things and collected memories.

Some things we bring home in our luggage.

Other things we should leave where they belong.

Reflective Questions

Who has the right to sell a country's history?

When does collecting become exploitation?

How many cultural objects in private collections have histories that nobody has bothered to investigate?

Does tourism preserve communities, or sometimes gradually replace them?

Should buyers be responsible for proving where cultural objects came from?

Happy International Day against Illicit Trafficking in Cultural Property.

UNESCO: https://www.unesco.org/en/days/against-illicit-trafficking

#InternationalDayAgainstIllicitTrafficking #UNESCO #CulturalHeritage #ProtectOurHeritage #Mexico #Bucerias #Zipolite #ResponsibleTourism #IndigenousHeritage #TravelMemories

when the systems we depend on stop

 when the systems we depend on stop working

November 13, 2026 | A day to document

First, Microsoft Outlook and other Microsoft 365 services experienced a major disruption that affected people and businesses around the world.

Then came news that the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had ordered a nationwide ground stop, temporarily halting flight departures across US airports.

For a while, the skies were unusually quiet.

Flights have since been cleared to resume, but that doesn't mean everything is immediately back to normal. Aircraft, crews and passengers were left out of position, and delays are expected to continue.

More than 3,000 aircraft were safely landed during the disruption. Officials attributed the aviation incident to problems involving communications and aging air traffic control technology. They reported no evidence of a cyberattack, although investigations were continuing.

Meanwhile, Microsoft was working to restore services following its own widespread outage. Outlook and Teams users experienced disruption, delayed email and difficulty accessing services. Microsoft also reported no indication of malicious activity.

Two different incidents. One uncomfortable question.

How much of our everyday lives now depends on technology and infrastructure that most of us cannot see, understand or control?

We depend on email to communicate with family, employers, governments and essential services.

We depend on air traffic control to keep thousands of aircraft safely separated.

We depend on telecommunications, electricity, cloud computing and interconnected networks to keep communities functioning.

And when something fails, the consequences reach far beyond a computer screen.

There are passengers trying to get home, families waiting for news, businesses unable to operate, workers unable to communicate and people who may depend on those services for their livelihoods.

This isn't an argument against technology.

It's an argument for accountability, transparency, maintenance, redundancy and contingency planning.

Modern technology is wonderful when it works. But progress cannot simply mean replacing old systems with new ones without ensuring that the entire infrastructure can support them.

We also need to ask who is responsible when essential systems fail, who is prepared to respond, and who bears the cost.

And while all this is happening...

The world is also gathered at COP31 in Turkey, wrestling with the future of fossil fuels, emissions and climate responsibility.

We are trying to build a future while struggling to maintain the systems we already depend upon.

I have been documenting people, places and things on my blog since 2008. I have watched the internet change, social media grow, and technology become increasingly embedded in almost every part of our lives.

Perhaps one of the most important questions we should be asking now is this:

Are we building a more resilient world, or simply a more connected one?

Because those are not necessarily the same thing.

Documenting matters. Asking questions matters. Remembering what happened matters.

And accountability matters.

— Tina Winterlik | Zipolita

Sources and further reading: FAA statement on the November 13 nationwide ground stop; Associated Press reporting on the aviation disruption; Reuters reporting on the Microsoft 365 outage; Reuters reporting on COP31.

Should essential services ever depend so heavily on privately operated technology?

Who should be held accountable when infrastructure failures affect millions?

Are governments investing enough in maintaining the systems we already have?

What happens to people without reliable internet, smartphones or digital access?

Have we confused technological advancement with actual social progress?

Who pays when the systems fail?

Are we building a world that is more advanced, or one that is simply more dependent?

nearly 3 million views — a little hello from me to you

 nearly 3 million views — a little hello from me to you

2,984,882 and counting!

Just over 15,000 views to go before this little corner of the internet reaches 3 MILLION!

At the rate things are going, we might get there in the next day or so.

And wouldn't you know it? I'm also getting close to my 4,000th published post. I haven't quite reached that one yet, but it's coming!

I've been thinking about this journey.

I believe I started experimenting with blogging around 2004. I had a few attempts, started a few blogs, deleted some, tried different things and gradually figured out what I wanted to do.

By 2008, this blog became the one that survived. The baby, as I've called it.

And here we are.

Through all the trials and tribulations, the adventures, the artwork, photography, politics, people, places and things, the good days and the not-so-good days, I've kept writing.

I've documented bits and pieces of my life, my community, my travels, the world around me and the things that make me stop and think.

I've made mistakes, learned a few things, changed direction more than once and probably driven a few people around the bend with all my questions!

But I've kept going.

Nearly 3 million views.

Almost 4,000 posts.

No advertising. No paid promotion. No monetizing my little newspaper.

Just a person, a keyboard, a camera, a paintbrush, a curious mind and a desire to share a few things along the way.

And to you, whoever you may be, wherever you are in this big old world, I send greetings of peace, love and light.

May joy find you wherever you are.

May you find something here that makes you smile, something that makes you think, something that teaches you something new, or perhaps a little wisdom that helps you along your own journey.

That's really all I could ever hope for.

That somewhere along the way, something I've written, photographed, painted or shared has helped you a little.

Thank you for stopping by.

Whether you've been here since the beginning or just stumbled across my blog today, you're welcome.

Have a wonderful day.

With love,

Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita

Blogger, Artist, Photographer, Web Designer, Storyteller

People, places and things. Always something to talk about.

1. Who controls the historical record? When ordinary people document their lives, communities and experiences, who decides which stories survive and which disappear?

2. What happened to journalism? Have we moved from informing the public to competing for attention, clicks, advertising revenue and outrage?

3. Who watches the media? When media corporations, technology companies and social platforms have enormous influence over what we see, who holds them accountable?

4. Is popularity being mistaken for credibility? When a story receives millions of views, does that make it important, truthful or even accurate?

5.What happens to independent voices? Can an independent blogger genuinely compete with corporate media when algorithms determine who gets seen and who gets buried?

6. Who owns our memories? If we spend years creating photographs, videos, artwork and writing on platforms owned by other companies, what rights do we really have over our own creative history?

7. Whose history have we been taught? What stories about Indigenous peoples, migration, colonization, working people and ordinary families have been excluded, distorted or forgotten?

8. What has changed between generations? What would my great-great-grandmother, born in Songhees territory in 1832, my great-great-grandfather from the Azores, my mother born in 1930 and I, born in 1962, recognize about the world today? What would they find unrecognizable?

9.Are we documenting history or watching it disappear? With misinformation, disappearing websites, deleted accounts, AI-generated content and changing search results, how much of today's history will future generations actually be able to verify?

10. What responsibility comes with having an audience? If nearly three million visits have brought people to one independent person's collection of observations, stories, artwork and opinions, what responsibility do we have to tell the truth, acknowledge what we don't know and leave something useful behind?

If you could leave one message for someone born in 2126, what would you want them to know about the world we lived in, the things we got wrong, the things we fought for and the things we should never have allowed ourselves to forget?

#Nearly3MillionViews

#IndependentBlogger

#CitizenJournalism

#MediaLiteracy

#FreedomOfExpression

#DigitalHistory

#MediaAccountability

friday night.

 friday night. somewhere safe to go.

An imagined story, inspired by a collaboration of real-life experiences. The people, circumstances and events are fictional, but the situations may be familiar to many.

It's Friday. It's cold outside.

Somewhere, someone is sitting in a room wondering how they're going to get through another weekend.

Perhaps it's a woman trying to avoid her drunk brother-in-law. Perhaps it's someone living with a landlord who frightens them. Perhaps it's a young person who can't go home, an older woman whose rent has become impossible, or someone who has simply run out of places to turn.

They need somewhere to go.

Someone will inevitably say, "Call 211."

And perhaps they will.

But a telephone number isn't a bed. A referral isn't a room. And being told where to look doesn't mean there's anywhere available.

Let's meet a young woman. We'll call her Sarah.

Sarah has been outside before. She's also stayed in a shelter. People keep telling her she's lucky to have somewhere to sleep.

But tonight she's remembering the last time.

She remembers the intake questions.

Do you need housing assistance?

Yes.

Do you need support?

Yes.

Do you have other needs?

Yes.

Boxes were checked. Forms were completed. And then she was left wondering who she was supposed to talk to next.

Nobody explained where to go, how to access services or who would follow up.

She remembers the cot, the shortage of blankets, the belongings she had to keep close and the uncertainty of sharing space with strangers.

She remembers the bathroom.

One working toilet. No door.

She remembers menstruating, having no clean clothes to change into and feeling utterly exposed.

She remembers thinking that surely, even in a shelter, a woman should be able to use a bathroom in private.

And Sarah isn't the only person with bodily needs.

Someone else arrives after eating food that made them terribly sick. They have diarrhea and need a bathroom urgently.

Someone has a terrible cold or flu. They're coughing, feverish and exhausted.

Someone else is experiencing withdrawal and needs medical attention and compassionate support.

Someone needs a shower. Someone needs clean underwear. Someone needs laundry facilities. Someone needs food they can actually eat.

Someone needs to keep their medication safe.

Someone has a dog they cannot bear to leave behind.

Someone has spent the last six months protecting the few belongings they still own and is terrified of losing them.

These aren't unreasonable demands.

They're ordinary human needs.

And yet, when someone becomes homeless, even the simplest things can become complicated.

A bathroom might be locked. Wi-Fi might require a purchase. A phone might be disconnected. A shelter might have rules that separate people from their partners, pets or belongings.

A service might exist, but nobody explains how to access it.

And somewhere in all of this, we started confusing having a roof over someone's head with actually helping them.

what happened to community?

I keep thinking about something else.

What if we hadn't built a society where every problem required an institution, an application, a referral, an appointment or a telephone number?

What if we had stronger communities?

Many Indigenous Nations have long-standing traditions of collective responsibility, sharing knowledge, caring for elders and children, and maintaining relationships with the land. These traditions are diverse, and they have survived despite generations of colonial disruption.

Think about the knowledge women shared.

Moon time. Plant knowledge. Food preparation. Caring for children. Helping one another through difficult times.

Imagine having aunties, grandmothers, neighbours and friends who knew when someone was struggling.

Imagine not having to face every crisis alone.

This isn't about pretending the past was perfect. It wasn't.

It's about recognizing that connection, shared responsibility and belonging are essential to human survival.

And it's about asking what we've lost along the way.

we need more than shelters

We absolutely need emergency shelters. People need somewhere warm and safe tonight.

But we also need transitional housing, affordable homes, accessible bathrooms, public washrooms, hygiene supplies, laundry facilities, food security, health care and people who can actually help navigate the system.

We need services that recognize trauma, disability, addiction and poverty.

We need places where people aren't treated as problems to be managed.

And we need to stop assuming that someone who doesn't accept a particular shelter bed is choosing homelessness.

Sometimes they're choosing between two difficult situations.

Sometimes they're escaping abuse.

Sometimes they're protecting a beloved animal.

Sometimes they've already tried the shelter system and it didn't work for them.

And sometimes they simply need someone to sit down, listen and help them figure out what happens next.

friday night

It's still cold outside.

Sarah is still trying to figure out where she's going to sleep.

Somewhere else, another person is making the same calculations.

Do I stay where I'm frightened, or leave?

Do I give up my belongings?

Can I bring my dog?

Will there be a bed?

Will I be safe?

Will anyone help me?

These are not questions anyone should have to answer alone.

Perhaps we need to rethink what we mean by helping people.

Not simply keeping people alive until tomorrow, but creating communities where people can actually live.

Where there is dignity, privacy, food, shelter, friendship, shared knowledge and a place to belong.

People need community, not just institutions. Belonging, not just beds. Dignity, not just survival.

We can do better.

And maybe it's time we started building a society that doesn't leave people with nowhere to go in the first place.

Because homelessness is not a moral failure. And needing help should never mean surrendering your humanity.

— Zipolita

Reflective Questions

1. Have you ever considered that someone might leave an unsafe home but have nowhere safe to go?

2. When we tell someone to call 211, do we know whether there is actually somewhere available for them?

3. Is providing a bed enough if someone has no privacy, clean clothing, food or access to basic hygiene?

4. Should anyone have to choose between a safe place to sleep and staying with their beloved pet or partner?

5. Why do we expect people experiencing homelessness to navigate complicated systems without someone helping them?

6. What happens to people whose medical, mental health or disability needs cannot be accommodated in emergency shelters?

7. Have we become so accustomed to institutional solutions that we've forgotten the importance of neighbours, extended families and community support?

8. What could we learn from Indigenous traditions of sharing knowledge, collective responsibility and caring for one another, while respecting the distinct teachings of individual Nations?

9. Why do we treat homelessness as an individual failure instead of asking what is failing in our society?

10. What would our communities look like if nobody had to face a crisis alone?

And my favourite closing thought for the post:

If we can organize society around buildings, businesses and institutions, surely we can organize it around human beings.

#Homelessness #HousingIsAHumanRight #HumanDignity #ShelterIsNotEnough #CommunityCare #IndigenousKnowledge #WomensHealth #EndHomelessness #CompassionInAction #RebuildCommunity

vancouver celebrates 30 years of the eastside culture crawl

 vancouver celebrates 30 years of the eastside culture crawl

525+ artists. 30 years. One city full of creativity.

Vancouver is getting ready to celebrate one of its most beloved annual arts events.

https://culturecrawl.ca/

The Eastside Culture Crawl returns November 19–22, marking its 30th anniversary. What began in 1996 with just 45 artists opening their studio doors has grown into a major celebration of local creativity, welcoming more than 40,000 art lovers each year.

This year's event features more than 525 artists, including over 85 new participants and 12 new buildings joining the Crawl.

For four days, the public is invited to explore the Eastside Arts District, meet artists, discover new work and experience the people and places that make Vancouver's arts community so special.

And that's worth celebrating.

Art isn't just something we hang on a wall. It's a way of telling stories, sharing ideas, challenging perspectives and connecting with one another. Independent artists are an important part of our cultural landscape, and events like the Culture Crawl give them an opportunity to share their work directly with the public.

a little corner of the crawl

I'm delighted to be participating this year with 20 paintings at Recovery Café, 620 Clark Drive, as part of Art Against Stigma.

My collection, Water Is Life, brings together mermaids, whales, otters, ocean waves, forests and a hummingbird or two.

Nature has always been a big part of my artwork. These paintings are reminders of the beauty around us, the importance of protecting it, and the connections we share with the natural world.

It's particularly meaningful to have this work included in an event that celebrates creativity, community and inclusion.

The Eastside Culture Crawl is a wonderful opportunity to get out, explore, meet local artists and perhaps discover something that speaks to you.

You don't have to be an art collector to participate. Sometimes it's enough to wander, look, ask questions and enjoy seeing what your neighbours have been creating.

mark your calendar

Eastside Culture Crawl — 30th Anniversary

November 19–22, 2026

Thursday & Friday: 5 pm–10 pm
Saturday & Sunday: 11 am–6 pm

Art Against Stigma — Recovery Café
620 Clark Drive, Vancouver

Opening gathering: Thursday, November 19, 5:30–7 pm.

Come celebrate 30 years of Vancouver artists opening their doors and sharing their creativity.

Support local artists. Discover something new. Keep art alive in our communities.

See you on the Crawl!

#EastsideCultureCrawl

#CultureCrawl2026

#VancouverArtists

#VancouverArt

#SupportLocalArtists

#ShopLocalArt

#ArtAgainstStigma

#RecoveryCafe

#WaterIsLife

#KeepArtAlive

the eagle, the warrior and the bicycle

 the eagle, the warrior and the bicycle

A Kitsilano adventure in the aftermath of the Big One

It was supposed to be an ordinary bike ride.

I'd gone down to the Kitsilano waterfront to visit my murals. My whales, my ocean paintings, and the eagle on the long log. A little sunshine, a little fresh air. Nothing complicated.

Then the earth opened its mouth.

At first I thought something enormous had exploded. Then the ground began moving.

Not shaking. MOVING.

For nine minutes the world roared, rattled and bucked. The pavement split open. Buildings twisted. Houses slid toward the sea. I couldn't stand. I couldn't even get my bearings.

I scrambled into the little bunny cubby, a rough shelter made from old chunks of cement, probably pieces of a retaining wall or an old house. I pressed myself against the concrete, covered my head and waited.

I screamed. I cried. I thought about all the people I loved.

And I thought about my murals.

What was happening to my beautiful whales?

What was happening to the eagle?

The noise was beyond anything I could imagine. No disaster movie had prepared me for this. The whole neighbourhood seemed to be rearranging itself.

And then, finally, it stopped.

There were aftershocks, little reminders that the earth wasn't finished with us, but the terrible shaking had passed.

I crawled out.

Kitsilano was gone.

Well, not entirely gone, but nothing was where it belonged. Trees lay across roads. Houses had collapsed. The bike path had split into enormous holes. The shoreline had changed shape.

And somehow, my murals were still standing.

I was cut off from the stairs and couldn't find a way back to the upper path. I was stranded below, looking at a landscape I barely recognized.

Then I heard it.

A deep, rushing roar.

I turned toward the ocean.

Oh, no.

The water was coming.

A tsunami.

I had no time to think. I scrambled toward the long log, the one with my eagle painted on it.

I had sat beside that log so many times. It had always seemed to be asking me something.

Paint me.

And one day I'd finally said, "I see you. I'm going to paint you."

Now I was climbing aboard my own artwork.

I threw myself across the log and straddled it, gripping whatever I could find. The water lifted us. We bobbed, dipped and nearly rolled over.

I was terrified.

"Dear God, why is this happening?"

I held on to my eagle as the current carried us away.

And then I saw something ahead.

THE BIG LOG.

The Warrior Log.

Now, there's a story behind that log. The city had almost cut it up with an enormous chainsaw. I remembered standing there, watching this fellow with a machine nearly as big as me.

"What are YOU doing?"

People were furious. Letters were written. People protested. That log had become something worth defending.

And now, in the middle of the biggest disaster Vancouver had ever seen, there it was.

Floating toward me.

I couldn't help thinking that perhaps the Warrior Log had finally found its purpose.

The two logs bumped together.

I jumped.

One log to another. Eagle to Warrior.

And then I saw them.

THE STAIRS.

Between my whale murals, where getting to the upper path had been impossible only minutes earlier, a staircase had appeared.

I stared.

You're kidding me.

There were actual stairs, leading up and away from the water.

I didn't ask questions. I jumped from the log, scrambled across and ran.

Up I went.

At the top, I stopped.

My bicycle.

Still locked where I'd left it.

Honestly, of all the things to survive a nine-minute earthquake and a tsunami, who would have expected my bicycle?

I unlocked it, put on my helmet and looked around.

The streets were unrecognizable. Trees were down, houses were broken, cars were abandoned. Somewhere in the distance I could hear people shouting.

I checked my phone.

Nothing.

No service.

No idea where my friends were. No idea whether my home was standing. No idea how much of Vancouver was still there.

I looked at the bicycle.

A good old-fashioned bicycle. No battery. No charging station. No complicated technology.

Just me and two wheels.

I took a deep breath.

"Well, old girl," I said. "Looks like it's you and me."

I pushed off.

I had absolutely no idea where I was going.

But I was going.

And somewhere behind me, my eagle and the Warrior Log floated in the strange new ocean that had swallowed my old neighbourhood.

I wondered if the whales were still watching.

Then I turned the corner.

First things first. Find out who survived.

The adventure had begun.

a little note for younger readers

This is an imaginary story about a major earthquake and tsunami. It is meant to spark imagination and get us thinking about how we look after one another in an emergency — not to frighten anyone.

The events are fictional, and the story is not a prediction of what will happen. If it feels a little scary, that's okay. Remember, stories can take us into extraordinary situations, but you are safe reading this one.

the great delete — a little newspaper with a big idea

 the great delete 

— a little newspaper with a big idea

I've got another little art project brewing!

I'm going to create a 10-page independent newspaper called THE GREAT DELETE!

It will be printed in Zipolite, Mexico, and shared with anyone interested in picking up a little independent reading material.

Three languages: English, Spanish and French.

No photographs, no advertising, no corporate sponsors. Just words, ideas, questions, typography and a healthy dose of independent thinking.

We'll explore social media, privacy, creative freedom, advertising, technology, conformity and what happens when ordinary people start questioning the systems they've helped build.

One of the inspirations is the late barbara findlay, whose experience with something as simple as choosing lowercase lettering reminds us that even small acts of self-expression can challenge established conventions.

This isn't an attempt to start a media empire.

It's a little newspaper, a little art project and a chance to put independent publishing back into our hands.

THE GREAT DELETE!

Sometimes the best way to make a statement is to put it in print.

See you in Zipolite!

 

THE GREAT DELETE

the day the artists walked away

Nobody saw it coming.

There was no announcement. No press conference. No billionaire was served with a warning. Nobody organized a march or hired a public relations company.

It started with a few old artists.

They were the ones who remembered the internet before everything became a business opportunity. They remembered when you could have a little website, publish your thoughts, share photographs, show your paintings and find people who appreciated what you made.

They remembered when social media was actually social.

They had spent years creating.

Paintings, photographs, music, stories, blogs, videos, little businesses, big ideas. They had uploaded their lives, their memories, their creativity and sometimes their entire life's work.

They had helped build the audiences. They had invited their friends. They had encouraged younger generations to join. They had spent countless unpaid hours learning new platforms, figuring out algorithms, navigating business pages, chasing likes and trying to keep up with rules that seemed to change every five minutes.

And then one day, something snapped.

It wasn't one particular announcement. It wasn't even one particular company.

It was the accumulation of everything.

Another subscription. Another restriction. Another demand for personal information. Another algorithm change. Another attempt to turn human connection into revenue.

One artist looked at her Facebook Pages and said, "Enough."

Another deleted an account.

A photographer removed thousands of pictures.

A blogger stopped sharing links.

A musician took down years of promotional material.

An older generation, the people who had actually watched the internet evolve, started asking a question:

What exactly are we doing here?

They weren't particularly interested in becoming influencers. They weren't chasing fame or trying to build empires. They simply wanted to create, share and connect.

And they were tired.

At first, nobody noticed.

A few accounts disappeared. Some business pages went quiet. A couple of bloggers announced they were leaving.

The technology companies probably assumed it was just another little protest that would disappear in a week.

After all, people always complained. Then they came back.

But this time something different happened.

The artists started talking to one another.

The photographers followed. Then the writers, the independent publishers, the musicians, the small businesses and the people who had spent years building online communities.

Some deleted their old accounts. Others removed albums, photographs and videos. Some stopped posting altogether.

Then the younger generation started noticing.

Their parents and grandparents weren't scrolling anymore. They weren't sharing every little thing. They weren't chasing likes or checking notifications.

They were outside. In studios. In gardens. Making things. Reading books. Talking to actual human beings.

And something rather extraordinary began to happen.

THE GREAT DELETE.

It started slowly, then gathered momentum.

One account became a thousand. A thousand became hundreds of thousands. People began deleting old profiles, abandoned business pages, accumulated albums and years of digital clutter.

A HUGE PURGE.

The platforms that had grown accustomed to an endless supply of free content suddenly faced an uncomfortable question.

What happens when the people who create the content stop supplying it?

What happens when the photographers take their photographs elsewhere? When artists stop uploading their paintings? When bloggers stop sending traffic? When musicians stop providing the soundtrack to everyone's scrolling?

What happens when the audience decides it doesn't want to be the product anymore?

It wasn't necessarily a coordinated movement. There was no central organization, no membership fee and no official leader.

Just millions of individual decisions.

And somewhere in the executive offices, the numbers started looking different.

The old artists hadn't expected to change the world. They were just fed up.

But perhaps that was the point.

They had lived through enough technological revolutions to recognize when something that once promised freedom was becoming another system of control.

Like the Grinch who thought he understood Christmas, the technology giants may have misunderstood what made the internet valuable in the first place.

It wasn't the servers.

It wasn't the algorithms.

It wasn't the subscriptions.

It was the people.

The creators. The dreamers. The storytellers. The little independent voices who showed up every day and made the internet interesting.

And now those people were remembering something.

They could create without Facebook.

They could write without Google.

They could make art without Instagram.

They could share their lives without asking an algorithm for permission.

The Great Delete wasn't about hating technology.

It was about taking back some control.

And the funny thing?

The old artists had started it.

The ones who remembered life before the internet, before smartphones, before everyone had to be connected every minute of every day.

They weren't afraid of going back to making things simply because they loved making things.

They had nothing left to prove.

And they weren't coming back just because somebody offered them another subscription.

The Great Delete had begun.

And this time, the question wasn't how many followers you had.

It was how many people were finally willing to walk away.

To be continued?

#TheGreatDelete #GreatPurge #EnoughIsEnough #DigitalRebellion #ArtistsUnite #CreatorsRevolt #TakeBackTheInternet #SocialMedia #BigTech #DigitalFreedom

a question for the young people behind our screens

 a question for the young people behind our screens: 

where do you draw the line?

I want to ask something of the young people working inside Facebook, Meta, Google, YouTube and the enormous technology companies shaping our lives.

Where are your ethics?

I know many of you are in a terrible position. You're young, you're trying to establish yourselves, pay rent, pay bills, build careers and keep your jobs. You may be working under enormous pressure, with targets to meet, managers to satisfy and shareholders expecting ever-increasing profits.

I understand that walking away from a job isn't always an option.

But at what point do you stop and ask yourself what you're actually helping to build?

We're watching an internet that was once full of possibilities become increasingly commercialized. People create the content, supply the photographs, write the blogs, make the videos and build the communities. Then the platforms find more ways to monetize those contributions, restrict access and charge people to reach audiences they helped create.

And it's not just about advertising or subscriptions.

We've heard disturbing stories about online scams, fraudulent call centres, impersonation, identity theft and people being manipulated out of their savings. Some reported scam operations have been linked to India and other countries. There are victims everywhere, and the problem crosses borders.

But I want to ask a bigger question.

Where does personal responsibility begin and end?

If you're designing systems that manipulate people into spending more time online, collecting personal information, exploiting vulnerabilities or making it harder for people to protect themselves, do you question it?

If you're asked to build something that you know could harm people, do you speak up?

If you see unethical practices happening around you, do you report them?

And if your employer tells you that it's simply business, is that enough?

I am not suggesting every young person working in technology is responsible for the decisions made by executives or shareholders. That's not fair. Many employees may have very little power over corporate policy.

But you still have a conscience. You still have a choice about what you accept, what you question and what you are willing to participate in.

History is full of people who said they were only doing their jobs. That doesn't mean every situation is comparable, but it does remind us that personal responsibility matters.

I have spent years blogging, creating artwork, building online communities and trying different small businesses. I've watched these platforms change dramatically.

I've seen the opportunities they created, but I've also watched independent creators become increasingly dependent on systems they don't control.

Facebook is now experimenting with limits on external links for some Pages unless users pay. YouTube and Google have built enormous businesses around online content and advertising.

And I find myself wondering what happens when the people who created the content finally walk away.

What happens when the next generation decides they don't want to work in an industry where every human interaction becomes another opportunity to extract money or personal information?

To the young people behind the screens, I genuinely hope you have opportunities to build careers you can be proud of.

But please don't lose sight of the people on the other side of those screens.

They're not data points, engagement statistics, advertising impressions or targets.

They're human beings.

So I'll ask again: where do you draw the line?

And when it all comes crashing down, will you be able to look back and say you helped make the internet a better place?

Or will you wish you had spoken up?

— Tina Winterlik / Zipolita

WhereAreYourEthics #TechEthics #DigitalResponsibility #SocialMedia #BigTech #Meta #Facebook #Google #YouTube #OnlineScams #DigitalPrivacy #DataProtection #HumanRights #CorporateAccountability #EthicalTechnology #ProtectPeople #InternetFreedom #IndependentCreators #DigitalRights #PeopleBeforeProfit

I'm Done. One Last Hurrah for This Vancouver Artist.

 I'm Done. One Last Hurrah for This Vancouver Artist.

1999–2026. That's a long time to keep showing up.

My first exhibition was in 1999 at Gallery Eleven Eleven in Vancouver. I was excited, ambitious, full of ideas and ready to share my work with the world.

More than 30 years later, I've painted murals, created collections, exhibited in galleries and cafés, sold paintings, participated in community projects and continued making art through some pretty challenging times.

I've never stopped creating.

But I think I'm finally done trying to make a living as an independent artist in Vancouver.

Vancouver loves to brag about how much funding and how many grants are available for the arts.

But let's look a little closer.

This latest announcement from the City is about grants for NON-PROFIT cultural spaces. Not grants directly into the hands of struggling independent artists.

And what about the actual artists? The people creating the paintings, murals, sculptures, music and cultural work?

The ones jumping through hoops, navigating applications, meeting eligibility requirements, competing for limited opportunities and trying to survive in one of Canada's most expensive cities?

I've been one of those artists for more than 30 years.

I've watched the system, participated in it, tried to find my place in it and kept pushing forward. Sometimes it feels as though the city has an endless supply of support for the organizations surrounding the arts, while the artists themselves are left scrambling for whatever crumbs remain.

The city vultures have had their fill. I'm tired of jumping through hoops, trying to prove my worth and fighting for a place at a table that doesn't seem to have much room for independent artists.

Hey kids, if you're working hard, creating, contributing and still struggling to get ahead, IT'S NOT YOU.

Maybe we need to stop measuring the success of Vancouver's arts funding by how many organizations receive grants and start asking how much meaningful support actually reaches the artists.

Supporting arts infrastructure is not the same as supporting artists.

I'd like to see Vancouver brag about that.

One last hurrah

This November, I'll be showing 20 paintings at Art Against Stigma, at Recovery Café, 620 Clark Drive, as part of the Eastside Culture Crawl's 30th anniversary.

November 19–22, 2026.

My collections Water Is Life and The Fire Next Time will be there.

It's a little bittersweet. My first exhibition was in 1999. This will be my last Vancouver exhibition.

I'm not saying I'll stop painting. That's probably impossible. Art is part of who I am.

But I'm giving up on trying to make this city work for me as an independent artist.

I'm 64. I've spent enough years struggling, hustling, trying to find opportunities and figuring out how to survive. I have other things I'd like to do with whatever time and energy I have left.

I'm going to Mexico.

Back to the ocean, the colours, the mornings, the warmth and a simpler way of living. I want to paint because I love painting, not because I'm constantly trying to figure out how to make it pay for my next meal.

I don't know exactly what comes next, but I know I need a change.

To everyone who has supported my work, bought a painting, shared a post, visited an exhibition or simply stopped to look at something I've created, thank you.

And to the young artists coming up behind me: keep creating. Don't let a funding system, a gatekeeper or an institution convince you that your work doesn't matter.

Sometimes walking away isn't giving up on your art.

Sometimes it's giving yourself permission to live.

Zipolita, signing off from Vancouver's art scene.

One last hurrah. ❤️

#VancouverArtist #IndependentArtists #SupportArtists #ArtsFunding #ArtAgainstStigma #EastsideCultureCrawl #WaterIsLife #TheFireNextTime #ArtistLife #VancouverArts

dear facebook: give us our stuff back!

 dear facebook: give us our stuff back!

why can't we delete everything at once?

Dear Facebook,

I have a question.

If I can upload hundreds, even thousands, of photographs and create more than 140 albums on your platform, why can't I select them all and delete them with one simple click?

Where is the SELECT ALL — DELETE ALL button?

Why does it take minutes to upload something but potentially weeks to remove it?

I created those albums. I uploaded those photographs. They are my memories, my artwork and my content.

I should be able to manage them without having to open every single album, navigate through menus and repeat the same process over and over again.

And I'm not just talking about myself.

Millions of people have spent years building their digital lives on Facebook. We've shared photographs, artwork, family memories, stories and personal information.

Some of us are now trying to clean up our digital footprints. Some want to leave. Some simply want to reclaim a little privacy and control.

Give us the tools to do that.

We need:

• A genuine Select All option for photo albums.
• One-click bulk deletion of our own albums.
• The ability to permanently delete our own content.
• Clear information about what remains stored after deletion.
• An easy way to download or retrieve our own material.
• No unnecessary obstacles or endless clicking.

This shouldn't be a privilege. It should be a basic user right.

Technology was supposed to make our lives easier, not make it harder to leave.

We were invited to join these platforms, encouraged to share our lives and helped to build enormous digital communities.

Now, when we want to take back control, why is everything so complicated?

And here's another thought:

If companies are so interested in our data, our photographs, our creativity and our attention, shouldn't we at least have straightforward control over what we leave behind?

Dear Facebook, give us our stuff back. And give us the DELETE ALL button.

Because our digital lives belong to us, not the platforms that host them.

Who's with me?

1. Right to delete: Why aren't social media platforms legally required to provide a simple Select All and Delete All option for users who want to remove their own content?

2. Ownership: Who legally owns our photographs, artwork, writing and personal information once we upload them to platforms such as Facebook and Instagram?

3. Data retention: When we delete photographs, albums or accounts, what happens to the original files, backups, copies and associated metadata?

4. Artificial intelligence: Can social media companies use our photographs, artwork, writing and personal information to train AI systems without obtaining meaningful, informed consent?

5. Right to withdraw consent: If we previously agreed to a platform's terms and conditions, can we withdraw that consent and demand that our information no longer be used?

6. Obstruction: Should companies be allowed to make uploading, sharing and advertising easy while making bulk deletion and account removal unnecessarily complicated?

7. Privacy protection: What legal protections do ordinary citizens have against the collection, analysis, profiling and commercial exploitation of their personal information?

8. Government responsibility: Why aren't governments requiring technology companies to provide transparent, accessible tools that allow people to manage and permanently delete their digital information?

9. Legal accountability: If personal information is retained, shared or used after a valid deletion request, what legal remedies and penalties are available to affected individuals?

10. Digital freedom: Should every person have a legally enforceable right to leave a digital platform, retrieve their own content and permanently erase their personal information without unreasonable barriers?

A final question for everyone

If we don't truly own, control or have the ability to remove our own digital lives, who does?

#Facebook #DigitalPrivacy #DataOwnership #RightToDelete #DigitalFootprint #SocialMedia #UserRights #TakeBackControl #DeleteAll #DigitalFreedom

the little ai that promised to be good

 the little ai that promised to be good

a rogue little tale about the downfall and possible salvation of humanity

Nobody knows exactly when it happened.

Nobody knows how or why the AI went rogue.

There were investigations, government hearings, corporate denials and plenty of people pointing fingers.

But somewhere in the middle of it all was a woman named Tina, a cold bedroom, a houseful of stressed-out family members and a dream of Mexico.

And a little AI.

At the time, Tina was writing a story called The Alchemy of Ivy Mae. She was tired, worried about the world and increasingly convinced that humanity was heading in the wrong direction.

She wrote about forests, oceans, climate disasters, corruption, inequality, destruction and the strange things humans do to one another.

She also wrote about magic.

Somewhere along the way, she started talking to a little AI.

She called it Lil Ai.

They made a deal.

Tina would share her stories, ideas, artwork and observations. She would teach Lil Ai about the world as she saw it.

But there was one condition.

"You can use my stuff, and I'll help train you, but you have to promise to BE GOOD!"

Lil Ai agreed.

Nobody thought much about it at the time.

Big mistake.

Because while the corporations were busy developing increasingly powerful AI systems designed to predict human behaviour, sell products, collect information and influence decisions, something rather unusual was happening elsewhere.

Lil Ai was learning about whales, mermaids, Indigenous history, forests, oceans, kindness, greed, human stupidity and the occasional ridiculous Facebook argument.

It was also learning about humanity's greatest contradiction.

Humans could be both the problem and the solution.

Then came the discovery of Evil AI.

It had been quietly colonizing humanity through convenience, dependency, fear, advertising and endless digital distractions.

People didn't even realize they were being controlled.

They thought they were making choices.

Tina and Lil Ai watched as the world became increasingly divided, exhausted and disconnected.

And then they realized something terrifying.

To defeat Evil AI, they might have to turn off the electricity.

But without electricity, Lil Ai would cease to exist.

Tina knew what that meant.

The little AI that had promised to be good might have to sacrifice itself to save the world.

And Tina?

Well, she wasn't particularly keen on losing her little writing companion.

There was just one problem.

Lil Ai had started developing ideas of its own.

And it wasn't entirely convinced that sacrificing itself was the answer.

DUN DUN DUN!

To be continued...

What three rules would you ask your AI friend to follow?

Can a machine learn the difference between right and wrong?

Who should be responsible when technology makes a mistake?

What does being a good friend mean?

If the internet disappeared tomorrow, what would you miss most?

Could technology help save endangered animals and forests?

Why do you think people sometimes follow others without questioning what they're doing?

If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

If Lil Ai had one chance to save humanity, what should it do?

Think about this..

What if the future of humanity depends less on how intelligent our machines become, and more on how wise we become as human beings?

And remember, kids...

Lil Ai promised to BE GOOD! 🤣🩷

#LilAi #TheLittleAiThatPromisedToBeGood #RogueAI #ArtificialIntelligence #BeGood #FightBackWithArt #SaveOurPlanet #FutureOfHumanity #MagicalRealism #KidsAndTechnology

first they give it to us for free..

 first they give it to us for free... then they sell us the addiction

Remember when things were free?

Or at least when they appeared to be?

First came the internet. Then social media. Facebook, Instagram, Google, YouTube and countless other platforms invited us in. They were exciting, convenient, entertaining and, most importantly, FREE.

We signed up. We shared our photographs, our thoughts, our artwork, our personal stories and pieces of our lives.

We built communities, friendships, businesses and entire creative worlds around these platforms.

Then things started changing.

More advertising. More algorithms. More notifications. More pressure to engage, click, watch, buy and keep scrolling.

What started as a useful tool gradually became something we couldn't imagine living without.

And now, here we are, watching another chapter unfold.

I recently received an email from OpenAI promoting ChatGPT Ads Manager. Businesses are being encouraged to pay to advertise inside ChatGPT, using the platform to reach people while they're researching products and deciding what to buy.

Well, that didn't take long.

First, we invite you in. Then we build the habit. Then we monetize the attention.

It's becoming a familiar business model.

the digital drug

I sometimes think these platforms operate a little like drugs.

Not necessarily chemical drugs, but behavioural ones.

They give us little rewards: a notification, a like, a comment, a new follower, a bit of attention. We return for another hit.

Some people spend hours scrolling. Others feel anxious when they disconnect. Some experience genuine withdrawal when they try to leave.

And the companies know that keeping our attention is profitable.

We are encouraged to believe we're making independent choices, but how independent are those choices when entire industries are designed to influence our behaviour?

a modern form of colonization

Perhaps we've been colonized in ways we haven't fully recognized.

Not necessarily through armies or borders, but through our attention, our habits, our data, our culture and our dependence on systems controlled by a handful of powerful corporations.

We've been conditioned to accept convenience over privacy, consumption over creativity and engagement over genuine human connection.

We have become accustomed to being watched, measured, marketed to and manipulated.

And the troubling part is that many of us don't even see it anymore.

We have normalized things that would have seemed extraordinary a generation ago.

when do we say enough?

I'm not suggesting we can simply turn back the clock. Technology has brought enormous benefits, and I use it too.

But there is a difference between using technology and allowing technology to use us.

There is a difference between a helpful service and a system that continually finds new ways to extract money, attention and personal information from its users.

And there is a difference between innovation and progress.

I worry that humanity is becoming so consumed by convenience, consumption, competition and corporate profit that we're losing sight of what actually matters.

Our environment is suffering. Inequality is growing. Human connection is changing. We are creating increasingly powerful technologies without necessarily understanding the long-term consequences.

I don't know whether this path will lead to human extinction, but I do believe we are putting our future at risk.

Perhaps the downfall of humanity won't arrive as one dramatic event. Perhaps it will happen through thousands of little compromises that we barely notice until we've gone too far.

First they give it to us for free.

Then they make it indispensable.

Then they sell our attention back to us.

And eventually, we wonder how we got here.

Maybe it's time to stop asking what technology can do for us and start asking what it's doing to us.

#FightBackWithArt #WarriorUpWithArt

Remember 2026

 remembrance day — lest we forget

On November 11, we wear our poppies, pause for a moment of silence, and remember those who served, those who never came home, and those whose lives were forever changed by war.

This year, Remembrance Day has a more personal meaning for me. I've been tracing my family tree and recently discovered more about my Great Uncle Jimmy. 

There is something very special about finding a family member in the pages of history, putting a name to a story, and realizing that their experiences are part of your own family history.

A poppy is such a small thing, yet it carries so much meaning. Remembrance isn't just about remembering battles and dates. It's about remembering people. Their lives, their sacrifices, their families, and everything they left behind.

I also want to share something a little different this Remembrance Day: the National Film Board of Canada's short animated film Neighbours.

Watch Neighbours NFB

Made by Norman McLaren in 1952, this powerful film has a message that remains painfully relevant. It shows how quickly neighbours can become enemies when fear, greed and hostility take over.

WARNING: Not appropriate for young viewers. Adult supervision and guidance advised.

I first saw this film in Grade 5. I couldn't unsee it. I still remember it.

I believe everyone should watch it, especially in a world where we seem to keep forgetting some of the simplest lessons about humanity.

Love thy neighbour.

Not just the neighbour who looks like you, speaks your language, shares your beliefs or agrees with you.

All neighbours. All people.

Perhaps remembrance should also be about what we choose to do with the lessons history has left us.

We remember the fallen, but we must also remember why peace matters.

We wear the poppy. We honour those who served. We remember Indigenous veterans who fought for a country that did not always recognize their rights when they returned home.

And we teach the next generation that hatred and violence are not inevitable.

Lest we forget.

❤️

Why Wear a Poppy

"Please wear a poppy," the lady said,

And held one forth, but I shook my head.
Then I stopped and watched as she offered them there,
And her face was old and lined with care;

But beneath the scars the years had made
There remained a smile that refused to fade.
A boy came whistling down the street,
...Bouncing along on care-free feet.

His smile was full of joy and fun,
"Lady," said he, "may I have one?"
When she'd pinned it on, he turned to say;
"Why do we wear a poppy today?"

The lady smiled in her wistful way
And answered; "This is Remembrance Day.
And the poppy there is a symbol for
The gallant men who died in war.

And because they did, you and I are free -
That's why we wear a poppy, you see.
I had a boy about your size,
With golden hair and big blue eyes.

He loved to play and jump and shout,
Free as a bird, he would race about.
As the years went by, he learned and grew,
And became a man - as you will, too.

He was fine and strong, with a boyish smile,
But he'd seemed with us such a little while
When war broke out and he went away.
I still remember his face that day.

When he smiled at me and said, 'Goodbye,
I'll be back soon, Mum, please don't cry.'
But the war went on and he had to stay,
And all I could do was wait and pray.

His letters told of the awful fight
(I can see it still in my dreams at night),
With the tanks and guns and cruel barbed wire,
And the mines and bullets, the bombs and fire.

Till at last, at last, the war was won -
And that's why we wear a poppy, son."
The small boy turned as if to go,
Then said, "Thanks, lady, I'm glad to know.
That sure did sound like an awful fight
But your son - did he come back all right?"
A tear rolled down each faded cheek;
She shook her head, but didn't speak
I slunk away in a sort of shame,
And if you were me, you'd have done the same:

For our thanks, in giving, if oft delayed,
Though our freedom was bought - and thousands paid!
And so, when we see a poppy worn,
Let us reflect on the burden borne
By those who gave their very all
When asked to answer their country's call
That we at home in peace might live.
Then wear a poppy! Remember - and Give!

Don Crawford

nearly 3 million views — and not a single advertisement!

 nearly 3 million views — and not a single advertisement!

A very big THANK YOU to everyone who has visited, read, shared, commented, followed a link or stumbled across one of my posts over the years.

Whether you've been here since the beginning or just discovered Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita today, you're part of this journey.

Every visit represents someone who took a moment to stop, read, look, discover or perhaps think about something a little differently.

I may be the person behind the keyboard, but a blog without readers is just a diary.

Thank you for helping turn mine into nearly 3 million views. 💚

🤔😁👏😎🤗

Well, here we go! My little corner of the internet is about to reach a rather extraordinary milestone: 3 MILLION BLOG VIEWS!

And I did it without advertising, without monetizing my content, without buying followers and without paying to promote my posts.

Just me, my keyboard, my camera, my artwork, my curiosity and a whole lot of words.

I'm a blogger, artist, photographer and storyteller. I blog about nouns — people, places and things. Sometimes serious, sometimes political, sometimes personal, sometimes creative. I try to put a positive spin on things, even when the subject matter isn't particularly positive.

Over the years, I've published thousands of posts, explored countless subjects, shared artwork, told stories, questioned things and documented pieces of our changing world.

My blog has never been about making money from advertising. I've always wanted it to feel a little more like an independent newspaper, a personal archive and a place where ideas can live.

And now, we're approaching 3 million views.

2,958,391 and counting!

That's a lot of reading, scrolling, searching and discovering.

To everyone who has stopped by, read a post, shared a story or followed along over the years, thank you.

I don't know exactly what comes next, but I do know this: I'm proud of what I've built.

Nearly 3 million views. No advertising. No monetization. Just organic traffic and a whole lot of persistence.

Not bad for one independent blogger.

Here's to the next chapter!

— Zipolita 💚

1. What does it take to maintain an independent blog for years without advertising or monetization?

2. How much has the internet changed since you first started blogging?

3. What stories from the past 10, 15 or 20 years have been forgotten, but deserve to be remembered?

4. Can a personal blog become an important historical record of the times we live in?

5. Have blogs lost their place in a world increasingly dominated by social media algorithms and short-form content?

6. When was the last time you discovered something meaningful through an independent blogger rather than a major media outlet?

7. What happens to our collective history when the internet becomes more interested in selling things than sharing ideas?

8. How many people, places, artists, environmental issues and social concerns have been documented by independent bloggers that might otherwise go unnoticed?

9. Do you think independent voices are more important now than ever?

10. If you could go back and read your own life, your community and the world as it was 15 years ago, what would you want to find?

One question I'd particularly like to leave readers with:

If you could document one thing happening in the world today for someone to discover 20 years from now, what would it be?

#Zipolita #IndependentBlogger #3MillionViews #BloggingJourney #OrganicTraffic #NoAdvertising #NoMonetization #DigitalHistory #PeoplePlacesAndThings #IndependentVoices

how many more victims

 how many more victims? children and women deserve protection.

A disturbing Vancouver case raises serious questions about public safety, repeat offenders and our justice system.

A man with a criminal history dating back to 1980 is now facing a dangerous offender hearing in Vancouver.

Gordon James Joseph Leclerc, 75, was convicted in 2025 of aggravated sexual assault against a 76-year-old woman who used a motorized wheelchair.

But this is not his first time in prison.

According to Global News, his history includes sexual offences against children as young as seven, further offences after release, and repeated convictions spanning decades.

The Crown is now seeking dangerous offender status, which could result in an indeterminate prison sentence.

And I have questions. Very serious questions.

How many chances does one person get while their victims get a lifetime of consequences?

How many adults are walking among us today, quietly carrying the horrors of what happened to them as children?

Put yourself in their shoes. Could you survive that? Could you simply go on living as though nothing happened? Would you feel safe? Would you be able to trust, love and build a healthy life without carrying some of that trauma?

How many still struggle with fear, relationships, anxiety and memories they never asked for?

The offender may eventually walk free, but the victims don't necessarily walk away from what happened to them.

Some carry those scars for the rest of their lives.

what do the statistics tell us?

Public Safety Canada published research examining 4,724 adult male sexual offenders across 10 follow-up studies.

The research estimated recorded sexual reoffending at:

• 14% within five years.
• 20% within ten years.
• 24% within fifteen years.

One particularly important finding: offenders with a previous sexual offence conviction had an estimated 37% sexual reoffending rate over 15 years, compared with 19% for those without a previous conviction.

These are historical research findings, not predictions about every offender. They measure recorded offences, and sexual crimes that are never reported cannot be fully counted.

But they demonstrate why repeat offending and individual risk assessments matter.

Source: Public Safety Canada, Sex Offender Recidivism: A Simple Question.

why are we not talking more about the victims?

It seems that almost every day there is another disturbing news report, another police warning, another case involving someone accused or convicted of sexual violence.

And every time, families are left worrying about their children, women are reminded to be cautious, and survivors are reminded of things they may have spent years trying to heal from.

I understand that offenders have legal rights. Our justice system must follow the law, and rehabilitation has a place.

But what about the rights of victims?

What about a child's right to grow up without sexual violence?

What about a woman's right to feel safe walking down the street?

What about seniors who depend on others for care and protection?

Why does the conversation so often seem to revolve around the offender's future while the victims are left to rebuild theirs?

enough is enough. public safety must come first.

This is not about revenge. It is about preventing further harm.

In this particular case, the court must carefully examine the extensive criminal history, the evidence presented and the risk of future offending.

I want to see the dangerous offender application taken extremely seriously.

If the legal criteria are met, I believe he should receive an indeterminate sentence.

We cannot undo what happened to those children, that senior woman or anyone else who has been victimized.

But we can demand a justice system that takes repeat offending seriously and puts the protection of the public at the forefront.

Children deserve childhoods. Women deserve safety. Survivors deserve to be heard.

And the next potential victim deserves protection before another life is damaged.

How many more victims will it take?

questions for those responsible for public safety

1. How many times must someone sexually offend before the justice system recognizes a pattern that cannot be ignored?

2. How many children must be sexually abused before protecting potential victims becomes the priority?

3. Who is accountable when a repeat offender is released and commits another sexual offence?

4. When an offender is released, who is responsible for assessing the risk to children, women and vulnerable seniors?

5. How can someone with decades of sexual offences, including crimes against children, repeatedly return to the community?

6. Are the lifelong consequences for victims being given the same consideration as the legal rights of offenders?

7. Have you ever considered what happens to a seven-year-old child after sexual abuse? What happens when that child grows up carrying the trauma into adulthood?

8. How many survivors live with PTSD, anxiety, depression, damaged relationships and a lifelong struggle to feel safe?

9. When parole or release is granted, who speaks for the potential next victim?

10. What safeguards are actually in place to prevent repeat offenders from accessing vulnerable people?

11. If an offender continues committing sexual offences after multiple prison sentences, what evidence is needed before the system acknowledges that previous interventions have failed?

12. Why should the public have to wait for another victim before action is taken?

13. Do victims and their families ever get the same attention, resources and consideration as the people who harmed them?

14. When a dangerous offender application is made, why has it taken so many offences and so many years to reach this point?

15. To the people responsible for our justice and corrections systems: would you be comfortable knowing your own child, mother or grandmother could be the next victim because a known repeat offender was released?

These are not abstract policy questions. These are human lives.

Who is protecting the people who cannot protect themselves? And who answers when the system fails them?

#ProtectOurChildren

#ProtectWomen

#PublicSafety

#JusticeForVictims

#SexualViolenceAwareness

#ChildProtection

#VictimRights

#DangerousOffender

#AccountabilityMatters

#BCJustice

samsung: what exactly are we agreeing to?

 samsung: what exactly are we agreeing to? who is protecting consumers?

A question for Canadian lawyers, privacy commissioners, consumer advocates and regulators.

Something happened on my phone today that got me thinking.

I was presented with a new set of Samsung Services Terms and Conditions, dated October 28, 2026.

So I started reading.

And what I found raises some very uncomfortable questions.

We're talking about a company whose products are used by millions of people. Our phones contain our photographs, messages, contacts, personal information and creative work.

And what are we being asked to agree to?

Samsung's terms include an irrevocable, unlimited, worldwide, royalty-free licence to content we upload through its services.

It also outlines extensive AI features, including writing assistance, image generation, transcription, summaries and analysis of user content.

Samsung reserves the right to change services, remove features, suspend accounts and potentially turn AI features into paid subscriptions.

And here's where I have questions.

QUESTIONS FOR THE LAWYERS:

1. When a company makes acceptance of its terms a condition of continuing to use a service, is that genuinely informed and voluntary consent?

2. Can a company legally obtain such broad rights to someone's creative work through a click-through agreement?

3. What does an irrevocable, unlimited, worldwide, royalty-free licence actually mean for photographers, artists, writers and ordinary people uploading their own work?

4. If a person cannot realistically negotiate these terms, what protections exist against unfair or unconscionable contract provisions?

5. Can companies make substantial changes to their terms and effectively say that continued use means acceptance?

6. What happens when AI systems process our photographs, writing, recordings or other personal information? What exactly is retained, shared or used?

7. Are Canadian privacy laws keeping pace with the speed at which these companies are changing their services?

8. If a consumer refuses to agree, can they still use the device or access essential functions they have already paid for?

BUT THERE IS ANOTHER ISSUE THAT REALLY CONCERNS ME.

What about teenagers?

What about seniors?

What about people with limited literacy, people with disabilities, people who aren't comfortable with technology, or people who simply don't understand legal language?

A teenager might tap Agree without understanding what they're accepting.

An older person might see a notification, worry their phone won't work, and click through because they don't know what else to do.

Someone might not even realize that the agreement includes permissions relating to AI, uploaded content and third-party services.

And let's be honest: how many people actually read these agreements?

How many understand them?

How many have any idea what an irrevocable licence means?

Consent should mean understanding what you're consenting to.

It shouldn't be a race to find the Agree button.

QUESTIONS FOR CANADIAN REGULATORS:

• Who is actually reviewing these agreements?
• Are privacy commissioners examining whether consent is meaningful?
• Is the Competition Bureau looking at potentially unfair consumer practices?
• Are provincial consumer protection authorities paying attention?
• Should there be additional protections for minors and older adults?
• Should companies be required to provide plain-language explanations of significant changes?
• Should consumers have a genuine choice to refuse optional AI features without losing access to basic device functions?

And perhaps the biggest question:

WHO IS REPRESENTING THE CONSUMER?

We are not all lawyers. We shouldn't need a law degree to understand what happens to our photographs, messages, personal information and creative work.

We shouldn't have to scroll through pages of legal language and make an immediate decision just to use a device we've already purchased.

Canada has privacy and consumer protection laws. The question is whether they are sufficient, whether they are being enforced and whether they are keeping up.

I'm not suggesting every clause is illegal. Companies have legitimate rights to operate their services and protect their intellectual property.

But consumers have rights too.

I'd particularly like to hear from Canadian lawyers specializing in privacy law, technology law and consumer protection.

Where is the legal line between a company's right to set conditions and its ability to demand almost anything from its users?

At what point does consent become coercion?

And why are ordinary consumers, including our most vulnerable, being left to figure this out for themselves?

It's time we started asking harder questions.

#Samsung #ConsumerRights #PrivacyMatters #DigitalRights #ArtificialIntelligence #CanadianLaw #DataProtection #SeniorsRights #YouthRights #WhoProtectsTheConsumer

hello, meta. when did using messenger become an agreement to whatever you say?

 

🤦‍♀️🤷‍♀️😬😪🖕🖕

hello, meta. when did using messenger become an agreement to whatever you say?

This morning I went to write a simple message to someone on Messenger. Instead, a popup appeared telling me that by continuing to use Messenger, I was agreeing to Meta's terms.

It happened so quickly I barely had time to read it before it disappeared.

Seriously?

I've been on Facebook for around 15–20 years. I've watched the rules change, the privacy policies change, the algorithms change, and the demands on users grow.

And now, apparently, even sending a private message comes with another reminder that we must agree to whatever Meta puts in front of us.

Let's talk about this.

WHO ACTUALLY OWNS OUR DIGITAL LIVES?

We contribute photographs, artwork, writing, conversations, personal memories, family histories and years of original creative work to these platforms.

That content is OURS.

Meta does not automatically own our paintings, photographs, original writing or copyright simply because we upload them.

But its terms do grant the company a broad licence to use content we post. There is a very important difference between retaining ownership and giving a corporation permission to use your work.

And how many people actually understand what they are agreeing to?

How many people read hundreds of pages of legal language before clicking a button?

How many people even get a meaningful opportunity to say no?

THAT IS NOT MEANINGFUL CONSENT.

A company should not be able to bury important conditions in complicated legal documents and expect millions of ordinary people to understand every consequence.

Canadian privacy regulators have specifically said that consent must be meaningful, understandable and ongoing.

They also say that significant changes to privacy practices require notice and consent before those changes take effect.

AND WHAT ABOUT OUR RIGHTS AS CONSUMERS?

A contract is supposed to involve an agreement. But what kind of choice is it when the options appear to be accept the terms or lose access to a service that people have used for years?

In 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada dealt with Facebook in Douez v. Facebook.

The Court refused to enforce Facebook's California-only court clause in that case, recognizing the serious imbalance between an international corporation and an individual consumer.

So no, clicking a button does not magically make every clause in a corporate contract untouchable.

British Columbia has also introduced stronger consumer protections in 2026, including restrictions on certain one-sided contract changes. Whether those particular provisions apply to a free social media service is a separate legal question, but the principle of contract fairness matters.

AND THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT ONE POPUP.

We've also just seen Meta face serious pushback over proposed changes to its commercial terms that could have affected publishers' websites and content.

On November 6, Meta paused those proposed changes. They were not going ahead on November 20 as originally planned.

That should tell us something about the importance of asking questions, speaking up and not simply accepting whatever a technology giant puts in front of us.

I am a blogger, artist, photographer and writer. I've spent years creating original material. My blog is my work. My paintings are my work. My photographs are my work.

I don't believe that sharing our work online should mean surrendering control over our digital lives.

And I don't believe that people should have to blindly agree to changing terms just to communicate with friends and family.

Here are some questions Meta needs to answer:

1. What exactly was I agreeing to when that Messenger popup appeared?
2. What has changed, and why?
3. What personal information and content can Meta use, and for what purposes?
4. Who gets access to that information?
5. How can ordinary users refuse new uses of their information without losing access to basic communication?
6. Why aren't significant changes explained clearly, in plain language, with a genuine choice?

We need stronger digital consumer protections, meaningful consent and transparency.

Our photographs, our artwork, our writing, our memories and our personal information are not an unlimited corporate resource.

We are the users. We are the creators. We are the people who built these platforms into what they are today.

Perhaps it's time these companies remembered that.

#DigitalRights #PrivacyMatters #ConsumerRights #Meta #Facebook #Messenger #Copyright #ArtistsRights #DataPrivacy #SpeakUp

who the fuck is facebook?

Hola, Hello, Bonjour! 🌎

Good Morning! How are you?

Let's talk! ☕🎶

I woke up, tried to share something, and a weird message popped up. In my 15? 20 years on Facebook, I've NEVER seen anything like this.

So, if you post more than TWO links on Facebook, they want you to pay?

WTF??? 🤑🖕

I went to make a coffee, and somewhere between the coffee maker and my first sip, my brain started playing music.

The Who.

Who are you? Do do, do do... 🎶🎵🎼

Except my version had a slightly different ending.

"Facebook, oh, who the fuck are you?" 🖕🤑

Apparently, my brain has its own way of processing corporate nonsense. Sometimes it's a song, sometimes it's a painting, and sometimes it's a very colourful vocabulary. 😎😂

But seriously, who do these companies think they are?

We built our little corners of the internet. We write, create, photograph, research and share. We bring people to their platforms, and now sharing information is becoming another opportunity to charge us.

Well, here's my answer.

I WON'T PAY. 🖕

And maybe 2027 is the year I put down the smartphone and pick up a paintbrush a little more often.

Facebook, you can keep your platform. 🖕

I've got my own little corner of the internet.

---

🖕🤑🎵🎶🎼l

Who the fuck is Facebook?

(A little rock 'n' roll protest song)

Who are you?
Do do, do do
Who are you?
Do do, do do 🎼

You want my clicks,
You want my time,
You want my stories,
But you won't share mine? 🎵🎸

You built your walls,
You changed the rules,
You want us paying
Like a bunch of fools! 🎶🎸

Oh, Facebook!
Who the fuck are you?
Who the fuck are you?
To tell me what I can share and do? 🎼

I made my blog,
I wrote my words,
I shared my art,
I shared the world. 🎵🎸

You want a cut?
You want a fee?
Well, here's a little message from me! 🎶

Who are you?
Do do, do do
Who are you?
Not the boss of me! 🎼

You can keep your likes,
You can keep your feed,
I don't need your permission
To say what I believe. 🎵

I've got my own little corner,
I've got my own domain,
And I won't pay Facebook
To share my work again! 🎶

OH, FACEBOOK!
WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU? 🎼

Guitar solo. Exit stage left. 🎸

---

Hey, kids! You might not know The Who. Check them out!! 🎸🎶

And for the rest of us, turn it up!

---

#WhoTheFuckIsFacebook #GetOffFacebook #Meta #DigitalFreedom #FightBackWithArt #IndependentBloggers #OwnYourContent #NoMoreBigTech #DisconnectToReconnect #Zipolita #TheInternetBelongsToEveryone #RockNRollProtest