I do rotating rep. This sort of thing is why we make fun of the sound and video guys. Their entire setup is smaller than a few lights’ worth of equipment, and so our backs hurt and we question our career choices.
gaffa’s advice is worst-case scenario. I doubt you’ll have to do more than stretch it out straight, whip it up and down a few times, and recoil. But setting it out in the sun is way easier than using a blow-dryer to warm it up.
I got into video from sound back in the day when we were hauling huge bass cabinets like W bins and A2s.
I think you meant Capt Kirk, but it was sound advice that I’ll second.
Thanks! It’s one of those annoyingly long orange heavy duty extension cords (100 feet, probably? Maybe even 150. It’s too heavy for me to hold and coil the whole thing - I usually coil from one end until I can’t hold it, then coil from the other end to the first coil, but I do it all overhand 'cause I didn’t know any better.), and the next time it will be unpacked will be when we’re camping - it’s what we use to run electric into the camper. So sunlight is perfect. It definitely has some visible twists and turns in it, and has been patched with tape in a couple of places where the casing has cracked. I’ll give it a shot with the sun and re"training" and see if it works. 
I take it back. This is the HOLY BLOOD WAR of the industry: whether sound, lighting, or video guys have it easiest. That’s bigger than any cable coiling dispute.
If you can master the over under in your hand you can graduate to doing it on the ground. We do this with heavy cables, same deal but sideways.
Get on your knees with your legs apart, make your over coil about 18 inches around and lay it on the ground between your legs, now pull the under coil towards you. Repeat.
Small piece of advice, pick one end to roll from and always roll from that end, male or female it doesn’t matter. You will understand the first time you muck it up.
Capt
I don’t work with cable for a job, but I found theseat Home Depot a little while ago, and I love them. I suppose they’re too bulky for your kit, though.
I love the Velcro ties because they are cheap, light and infinitely adjustable.
Thank you, cable wrappers, for saving this thread from becoming what it almost did on page one: a thread entirely about programming code.
Oh, I KNOW I have it easiest in video. That’s why I got into video and out of audio. And have never been the slightest bit tempted by lighting.
Well, it was a bit different in that you had a group of professionals who are in agreement that there is One True Way to do something and that all the non-professionals are drooling imbeciles.
Hey!
Anyone got a napkin? 
I’ll bet you’ve never tried to read code that had been touched by 15 different programmers with 20 different editor settings, either.
I, of course, have to belong to a third, even more obscure camp:
int main( void )
{
//code
}
Although I have a very practical reason for my preference - because I’m a vi guru, that format is very easy to change indents & clean them up.
I also have a philosophical belief that the curly braces are part of the code block. So you can define, for instance, a while loop as
while (test)
// code block
Where code block is
// code line
or
// open code block
// one or more code lines
// close code block
Game Design Theory has the narratology / ludology debate.
The narratologists say “Games are **texts **-- so we should analyze them by using literary theory.”
The ludologists say “Games are **systems **-- so we should analyze them by using information theory.”
There’s been a truce for the last few years with most people agreeing to treat games as a hybrid form.
And ironically I would say they’re both complete hash; games are experiences and you can analyze it any way you like, but what actually matters is the subjective view of the audience independent of any existing theory. That is, I say that literary theories do not work because, in reading a given work, the only variable is in the reader’s knowledge, habits, opinions, etc. However; games have inherent variables in the potential experience the player may have completely apart from any personal quality or viewpoint. Thus, any given game cannot be purely analyzed, because “the” game does not actually exist; only “a” game experienced at a specific time and by a specific person or groups of people. Literary theory can be used to look at elements games, but not to analyze the game itself.
Likewise, Information Theory fails because the most significant aspect of a game resist quantification. We can analyze quantifiable elements in certain aspects of gaming, but this is not the ultimately important element.
But I’m tedious like that.
Better yet, use the colored ones for easy cable sorting.
Actually, they both work pretty well if you know their limitations. Literary theory is fine for discussing themes, and system theory is fine for discussing mechanics. They only become problematic if you want a unified framework for discussing theme AND mechanic, or for analyzing how theme influences the flow of play, or for exploring how mechanics can generate meaning. But for most games that isn’t an issue.
Maybe I just don’t have a great grasp of the technicalities of “literary theory”, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen people really struggle with rolling game mechanics into analysis. I’ve done it in English Composition papers (for Half-life 2, if you’re wondering), and there’s plenty of texts out there analyzing the shit out of things like the deliberate lack of choice in your objectives in the first Bioshock and how that interacts with the plot. I know that the Metal Gear (Solid) series is also a popular target for this kind of analysis.
Hell, video games aside, there are more than a few short stories and webcomics that deliberately use (often tabletop) game mechanics in their stories (albeit they often play fast and loose with them if needed) – in such a way that talking about the “rules” of a universe is a common topic when analyzing the story.
Maybe there’s more difficulties than I realize, though.
Another holy war in the news!
An orthographic war: (involves programmers & librarians too)
Hawaii
Hawai`i
Hawai’i
So, which is the correct/preferred spelling?
I think the greatest HOLY BLOOD WAR in the book business is the traditional publishing vs. self-publishing war.
To traditionalists, there is one and only one financial model for authors: money always flows FROM the publisher TO the author. Authors do not pay editors, cover designers, proofreaders, copy editors, illustrators, indexers, or designers. The publisher pays everything.
To self-publishers, the author pays all of the costs up front, does far more of the work, and keeps far more of the money. The author also does virtually all marketing.
From a bookseller’s perspective, self publishing (well, vanity presses and POD these days) seems to be entirely about eliminating all proofreading, fact checking, and professional design – and then reducing the discounts to distributors and bookstores. Oh, and cheap covers that curl up if you look at them funny.
The only “wars” I can think of in the finance industry are things like:
[ul][li]“the [credit/real estate/stock/whatever] bubble is ready to pop any day now” vs. “no, it isn’t”[/li]gold bugs vs. normal investors[/ul]