Marketing & SEO Discussion List - LED Digest

I had considered writing the following without naming names, but decided against it. I want the person concerned to know what I think. At the same time, this is just one small example of something that irks me from time to time in how some people write to the list. It is, of course, not a big problem, but I wish it weren't there at all.

Salem Kashou's post got two responses at the same time. Both are making, essentially, very similar points.  But the tone is TOTALLY different.

Beth Earle's post gives her contrary viewpoint in a thoroughly positive and encouraging manner.

> Don't think of it as paralyzing ... think of it as freeing.

> You've got the skills and the intellect -- and the opportunity

> to select what should work best. It really is a pretty

> cool concept.

Sheryl Coppenger's post, on the other hand, is (in my opinion) rude.

> if a beginner can't get anything out of the discussion

> here maybe he should find a newbie forum someplace

> and come back when he's "grown up" a little more professionally.

"You've got the intellect" versus "newbie - come back when you've grown up".

My presumption is that you didn't mean to be rude, Sheryl.  But this is exactly the often-discussed danger of email. There's no voice tone and body language to possible soften those words.

Yes, sometimes we might need to say something straightforward such as "I think that's wrong" or "That is a myth".  But ANYTHING we want to say can be phrased in a more or in a less respectful way.

I'd like to ask that respect be a guiding principle in posts, no matter how strongly we may disagree with someone - that we write as if it were a good friend standing in front of us --- or a 250lb biker, if that image makes more impact :).

Michael Linehan
Marketing Alchemy

I agree totally with Michael on how we should write here on LED. But I think he is also touching on an attitude I see too often on other forums.  When folks are communicating online they tend not to act the way they would in person.  They type faster than they think.

We all need to re-read our post carefully before hitting the send button.  We need to ask ourselves is this conveying a positive message or am I acting rude and out of place.  The computer allows us to reply quickly and facelessly and sometimes that can be a poor way to communicate.

I hope we all can continue to learn from this forum regardless of where we are on the learning curve.  Just remember that we all had to start at the beginning.  Also remember that customers that visit your website will also be at all different levels of understanding of your product and how to use a computer.  If you act cold and / or rude to them or your website is designed so only the most expert can navigate it you will loose a number of customers, regardless of how good your product is.

Rebecca Neilson

---

Written by Sheryl Coppenger
January 12, 2006

> I had considered writing the following without

> naming names, but decided against it. I want

> the person concerned to know what I think. 
    - Michael Linehan

And publicly, too.  Calling people out in public rather than sending a gentle reminder in private email is considered rude in some quarters too you know.

> Sheryl Coppenger's post... is (in my opinion) rude.

You will please note that the paragraph I quoted in the original posting was not saying "I'm a beginner".  It was saying "What if a beginner wanders in here -- they won't be able to get anything out of the forum". Third person. I was addressing the hypothetical case -- how do we handle it if a beginner wanders in here?.  If I had considered myself to be talking to the beginner, I *would* have expressed it more gently.

You seem to be upset over the use of the the word "newbie".  Please keep in mind that "newbie" is just a synonym for beginner.  It's not uncommon for people to introduce a question on forums with "I'm a newbie at xyz, can someone tell me...".    I've used it myself, referring to myself, on more than one occasion.  All of us are newbies at one thing or another.

I also included at the end of the post, "Just my $.02" which like YMMV has long been Internet slang for "This is just my opinion but I'm not emperor of the world and you should feel free to disagree".

> I'd like to ask that respect be a guiding principle

> in posts, no matter how strongly we may disagree

> with someone - that we write as if it were a good

> friend standing in front of us...

I'm sorry if the original poster felt that I insulted him.  It was not my intent.  I was trying to get a point across without writing a dissertation (unfortunately, I've had to write the dissertation anyway it seems).  But please keep in mind that people express themselves differently.  And a little tolerance for difference might be useful here too.  I *did* express myself the way I would to a good friend or a 250 lb biker.  Seriously.  And I haven't been beaten up in person yet. :-)  And I tried to include a cue that would make up for the lack of body language / tone that keeps me out of trouble in the non-digital world.

Sheryl Coppenger

---

I also was offended by the language and tone used by Sheryl in her post, and her half hearted attempt at an apology only made it worse.

Her apology, or rather her attempt to shift to the reader any blame for discomfort, reminded me of so many of today's sports stars who are caught with their pants down, figuratively or literally. (I live in Minnesota, so the actions of certain football players are pretty big news.) Rather than admitting that they were wrong, accepting responsibility, and committing to not acting that way in the future, they speak in the third person, use the passive voice, and apologize not for their error, but only for the other person's discomfort.

To me, that is more offensive because the apologizer seems to be implying that they are not at fault and only are apologizing because the person that they insulted feels bad. Sort of, you shouldn't feel bad, but I feel sorry for you because for some unknown reason you obviously feel bad.

Most discussion lists to which I belong, including this one, are moderated. And most moderators make a valiant attempt to filter out personal attacks. That seems to usually happen in this list. Adam, my vote would be for you to not publish posts which attack other members of the list. I see no problem and much value in posts which respectfully disagree with other members, but they must not stray across the line of disagreement so that they become personal.

Steven Rothberg

<Moderator Comment>

Point well taken, Steven. Even though I've been doing this job for some 6 years, I still make mistakes; moderating is continually challenging, which is partly why it's so interesting. But it's certainly not easy, and I totally understand and appreciate your advice here.

Let me openly state that I take full responsibility for what is published here, and that no one should point fingers at specific LEDers. If anyone should be blamed, it should be me, and it's good to get a lesson like this for me to learn from.

After re-thinking this, it would have made good sense in this case not to publish Sheryl's contribution. I don't feel her response was intentionally personal or adversarial, yet the tone (so often misconstrued, or altogether missed, via the written word) could certainly be interpreted as tending toward those characteristics.

But there's a slippery slope to this game. The more filtering I do of posts, the more invasive my role becomes as moderator. Certainly this isn't a problem with extremely negative posts -- in fact, it's the definition of the moderator's job. But in professional forums such as the LED I grant more leeway by the members to contribute what they will. I give posters here much more freedom than I do on other forums, especially if they have such a prolific record as

Sheryl's.

Sheryl Coppenger has had 70 posts published in the LED, dating back to issue 757 (published in January of 2000). While not getting carte blanche, Sheryl's posts definitely receive a degree of leeway; when I read her contributions they are more likely than not to be published. This is simply because of her great record here, along with my earned respect for her knowledge and the confidence I have in Sheryl improving the forum by her postings.

I will continue to work hard at this, and no doubt, continue to make mistakes. As I said, it is challenging, but I don't mean to make this any sort of excuse -- more an explanation of the thinking that goes on "behind the scenes."

My goal is always to maintain a professional forum, but a free and open one, where any kind of opinion can be expressed, so long that it is impersonal, professional, and on-topic. Whether this means I must publish contributions that negatively reflect on me, or the LED, or things I have investment in, should be irrelevant, and that's the fine line I'm treading when I begin moderating more aggressively.

Here the right metaphor may be the "edge of the wedge", or the camel's nose under the tent, for once I start filtering posts based on tone, then maybe I'll be tempted to filter based on personal inclination, and before you know it the tent is blown off the ground and we have a completely different forum.

I'm exaggerating here, but the point I'm trying to make is that as my moderating becomes more hands-on, the LED becomes more "constructed", more conceived, and may tend towards self-interest. I undertake a responsibility here to leave things as they are, to the largest extent possible, in order to facilitate an open exchange. Yet I also have a responsibility to keep things professional and impersonal, and I acknowledge that I tripped up there.

And sorry for the lengthy response, just trying to communicate some thoughts. Again - thanks to Michael Linehan and Steven Rothberg for the concern and reminders. These are important ethical concerns that need to be acknowledged, both by posters and moderators.

Best wishes,

adam

While I agree with almost everyone's points of view on Sheryl's rude and aggressive post, I don't think it should have been denied publication however. Judging by the number of resulting posts, perhaps Sheryl indirectly gave us something to ponder.

If anyone has read "The World Is Flat" (and you all should!), it is quite evident that the number of isolated individuals working in their own space, often at home alone or in little booths, whose working environment becomes less filled with human face to face interaction and more and more contact via computer, monitor and headset, we all may tend to forget that there is a living, breathing, feeling and often frustrated and insecure person at the other end of the "send" button. Often from a completely different culture, native language and time zone.

So as one post has said, we should re-read our posts before sending them and put ourselves in the place of the person receiving them and ask ourselves if we would want to receive a communication like this. After all, there will always be people out there who know a lot more than we do and a lot who know less. If there is one thing about this field that is always true, nothing remains the same for long, so constant learning and a steep learning curve will always be part of our daily reality. As frustrating as it can be at time, this is what this old fart loves about this field. Keep you learning and learning keeps your mind alert.

Frankly, I think it would be even better if we saved each of our submissions as a draft and read it again the next day before sending it. Not just for LEDers, but probably for any email or posts that deal with issues rather than just digital letters. It is too easy to leave basic civility aside as we are focused on problem solving.

Most cultures have a commonly accepted set of social rules that apply in face to face meetings that set the tone of civility, designed to grease the skids. The French shake hands and address the gathering with a welcome. Some offer beverages or food. Some discuss the weather. Ask after family. Americans tend to get the non-essentials out of the way quickly and get right to work. I am afraid the internet model emulates the American style rather than the more civil style of most of the rest of the world. Perhaps we need to take a deep breath and remind ourselves that it is not a machine we are interacting with, but other human beings.

We do, indeed, work in an ever more stressful, time pressured world and working environment. Our computers constantly irritate us, deadlines breath down our necks, clients make us do things exactly the way it should not be done but they are paying the bills and when we do it their way and it doesn't work they blame us. And so on. Sometimes it is hard not to be snappy. If we indulge ourselves it this and allow it to express itself outside the family (who we all know have an endless supply of patience with our frustrations!), it will spill over into our business relationships which is not good. It can alienate associates which is counter productive to our best interests. It also makes a negatively charged atmosphere. Also counter productive. Is there a cyber Emily Post out there? Maybe their time has arrived.

Since it looks as though we are going to be living with this style of working for the foreseeable future, this may be the time to establish for ourselves an internet civility that will enrich all our lives and lubricate the digital interaction. Especially since we may well be working modem to modem with task members from many diverse cultures where basic politeness is taken for granted and lack thereof is a severe affront and is likely to deplete a good working and ongoing relationship.

So civility is good for us personally and good for business. Cheap at the price.

So, cutting a bit of slack, Sheryl was probably having some bad days, couldn't snap at her client, didn't want to hit the kid, had to restrain herself from attacking her computer with a hammer, was still on hold after 30 minutes with a telephone software support number and without meaning to, took it out on the Digest. A lesson for us all. Sheryl I could be all wet, but I think we have all been there, so applicable or not, your post is a useful reminder to all of us.

On the other hand...

Some of the posts in response to themes brought up by other posters and myself included, have been a spew of personal preferences of how the responder likes to do things or encounter things him / herself. While this has surely been of help to me, for one, in refining my own thinking, it would be far more useful for our community, if the post(s) of this nature had been rethought and presented as more of a dispassionate and scientific observation based on experience with the market, with years of observing site visitor behavior, siting examples to illustrate ideas or technical applications with links to them for us all to see and links to other articles discussing further the topic in question. These are the posts that help us learn from each other and isn't that what we value about this great discussion opportunity? Learning and refining. Hard to do by yourself; very helpful to have input whether you agree with it or not.

And this is not about all of us agreeing on any topic, Salem, it is about the learning that can take place in a free exchange of ideas. It is not a "how to" book but a brain storming. I agree with you though, it is not constructive to trash ideas; but it is constructive to debate them in a civil manner.

Peter D'Aprix

peterdaprix.com

---

Written by Sheryl Coppenger
January 17, 2006

I apologized for giving distress because it is obvious that my post did so and it was not my intent to insult or distress anyone. I should have, as one person who followed up said, read it through again before sending it. What I said came out badly. I regret submitting the post stated in that way. I thought that was implied if not spelled out by a previous post, but if not I'll spell it out here.

I tried to explain my intention with the post, and I admitted to having a personal style that doesn't always translate well to email. Does that make it OK no matter what I post? No. It just means I struggle with it. Similarly, I'm not gifted with a metabolism where I can eat anything I want. I didn't use it as an excuse to gain more weight -- I've actually lost 40 pounds over the last 4 years. But it's a struggle and sometimes I slip up. I'm human.

I'd like to thank Adam for his support. But I would submit that *anyone* deserves the benefit of the doubt. Mr. Rothberg complained that I said the reader takes some responsibility for their reaction. Well, OF COURSE the reader takes some responsibility. As the saying goes, it takes two to have an argument. When you read a post and don't like it, you make a decision about whether it was malign or just clumsy. You decide whether to ignore, post or handle it in private email. Email to the person or the moderator. The tone of the email. And your reaction may say more about you than it says about the poster you've reacted to in the end, thanks to the choices you have made.

If it's never OK to get personal, as Mr. Rothberg says, then it's never OK to get personal. And IMO two people got *very* personal with me here.

As Adam pointed out, I've been on this list 5 years and posted 70 times. If I were a jerk who just liked to hang out and stir things up that would have come out long before now. Mr. Rothberg wants me to confess to intent that I didn't have. I'm not going to lie to keep the peace.

What I will do is unsubscribe from the list and pull the plug on a destructive exchange. I apologize for being the cause of the exchange. It *was* unintentional.

Regards,

<Moderator Comment>

I've expressed to Sheryl off-list that I would be very disappointed to see her go. Mistakes happen to *all of us*. The best thing we can do is to learn from them and move forward.

Please join me in urging Sheryl to stay an LEDer by posting via the email below. I will then send these messages on to Sheryl (this bypasses the problem of publishing her email address, which I'd like to avoid).

Save an LEDer! This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it

Best wishes,

adam

I wish people could remember that we come together as a community to share our experiences in a common endeavor ... yes, we will all have different perspectives, and therefore opinions, and ways of expressing our ideas ... no matter how good we are at expressing ourselves in written form, we all tend to write an occasional message when we are tired or frustrated ... we really need to remember that it takes two to tango, and that over-reacting to a simple mistake, or even a phrase that could merely have been worded differently, precipitates more distrust and bad feelings than the original event ...

I have seen a business partnership fall apart over a single e-mail that contained merely unhelpful language ... instead of simply acknowledging that, an end-of-the-world argument ensued, which precipitated the end of the business.

It is always a shame when a contributing member of a list decides to leave because of bad feelings. It is a shame that Sheryl's post became an example, because in the time I spend reading other lists, this list cannot hold a candle to the EGO problems or insensitivity found elsewhere, and while I did think the use of language was not "kind", it was nothing, compared to others I have seen, elsewhere. Debate becomes heated, but usually, people keep things in context here, and the mud slinging rarely happens. I am on lists that have very little redeeming value, due to the prodgious egos of the people involved. This list is significantly better than average in the tone and focus of the information it contains.

The one thing that I frequently see in other lists that I do not see here, (and that I think Salem might like, if I understand his points correctly), is that after a particularly lively thread, I frequently see a synopsis of the thread posted by somebody that either started it, or had been following it closely, that summarized the various positions put forth, and if there was any concensus, a conclusion... that is very helpful to people that may not have yet achieved "critical mass" in their perspective. Without this "critical mass" it is difficult to put all the different opinions into perspective.

Nobody has a patent on the truth. Every different perspective on an issue can bring benefit. The real pupose of lists like this (IMHO) is for people to share those perspectives, and it becomes very difficult to do so, if we are primed and ready to over-react to every slip of the pen that somebody else makes. Please be kind when posting, and even kinder in replying to posts that appear to have been made with less kindness than you feel is appropriate. This is a small thing that we can all give to the communities that we work and play in: tolerance. patience, kindness. This also extends to those that make an occasional mistake ... if the person doesn't have a history of ad-hominem attacks, then do not assume that they have just started.

Robert Bedard

---

Written by Diane Dennis
January 19, 2006

Hi All!

I too was offended, at first.  But then I got to thinking... In a sense this is way off topic but then again it's not. There are certain syndromes (such as Asperger's Syndrome) that, believe it or not, can cause a person to think they're making a funny joke when in fact they are insulting the other person.

They are typically highly intelligent individuals but their social skills can be from absolutely nil to minimal at best. I am constantly having to remind our daughter that our son is not trying to insult her, but that rather he thought he was making a funny joke. "Aspies" (Asperger's Syndrome sufferers) are also VERY literal in their understanding and speech and because of this, appear to "pull no punches" and are often considered as being very rude. They're also easily offended because of the literal aspect.

My point for bringing this up is that Asperger's Syndrome (and other PDD-NOS syndromes) is hugely on the rise, I believe there are more sufferers out there than anyone is aware of, and a majority of AS sufferers get VERY into computers.

There could very easily be "Aspies" that contribute to this discussion list. I'm not saying Sheryl is an "Aspie" but what I am saying is that because most folks are not trying to offend us with what they write, maybe we need to step back and not get upset when someone writes something that does offend us.

Instead maybe we can take a look at it and realize that it is entirely possible that the offender was NOT trying to offend and indeed had absolutely no ill-will whatsoever. Maybe the offender just needs help with their social skills.

Besides which, not taking it personal helps keep the blood pressure

down! :)

Just some thoughts...

Have a wonderful day!

Diane Dennis

aspergers-and-pdd.com

---

Written by Beth Earle
January 20, 2006

Diane,

Thanks for a true reality check. A newspaper interview recently quoted Tim Russert talking about his dad telling him that it takes as much time to be nice as it does to be rude -- and, as you pointed out, it goes a lot easier on the old ticker!

There was a guy here in our office a few years back that I couldn't stand and avoided as often as possible, but ... he taught me a valuable lesson and gave me a present that I still have up in my office: a tiny magnet (that he had received at a Rotary meeting) with these words on it:

"BE KIND -- for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle"

Yours in all that is kind and LEDly,

Beth Earle

Polysort

---

Written by Steve Pronger
January 20, 2006

>... Asperger's Syndrome (and other PDD-NOS syndromes) is hugely

> on the rise, I believe there are more sufferers out there than anyone

> is aware of, and a majority of AS sufferers get VERY into computers.

    - Diane Dennis

I'm certainly aware of it Diane. My 14 year old daughter (2nd of 6. Yes 6) was diagnosed with Asperger's. She once signed a birthday card to a disabled member of a class she was in "happy birthday, even though I hate people in wheelchairs". To her, the word "hate" had an entirely different meaning to what you or I would understand. She had no idea that her comment would cause offence. AS sufferers see the world entirely differently to you or me.

You're right, AS sufferers are highly into computers. With Claire, it's Playstation, but she was once banned from a particular game's user forum for "inappropriate comments". As you've suggested, she thought she was just being funny.

But having said that, I thought poor Sheryl copped way more flack than was warranted, and I do hope she returns to this list. My interpretation of her comment was that it referred to newbies in general, not specifically to Salem (who I don't think is a newbie at all) and that newbies might be better served by other forums before coming to LED to discuss broader issues. Poor choice of words perhaps, but that's how I read her her post, and didn't really have a problem with it. If she's been made to feel unwelcome and personally attacked, then that's most unfortunate.

Steve Pronger

---

Written by Vicki Lambert
January 20, 2006

First let me say that I am a “newbie” when it comes to building websites etc.  In fact, I am still using Front Page and my website reflects that. But I am not in that business.  My website is strictly for information and show only.  However, I have been reading this list for a couple of years or so now and I can state that 90 percent of what I read goes over my head.  So much so, that I rarely post responses.  However, as I said in a previous post, every once in a while I get a good idea or thought from it that I can use on my own website or help me navigate or understand other websites which is why I read the list.

This morning I was confused as to what has happened with this thread, because, in all truth, I couldn’t remember the post from Sheryl being that offensive.  So I went back into the archives and reread the posts to see what I missed the first time.  I reread her response to the “learning” thread and still did not see where the offense was.  As I just stated, I am a newbie and do not mind calling myself that.

My husband works in my business as well but does not read the list. So I had him read the post and he said he could see where someone could have been offended. It is not my place to tell someone else how they should feel or react to a post and I would never do so.  I am just saying that IMO, I think that this is a case of it could offend or not depending on whether or not you chose to be offended and whether or not you were familiar with the tone of the list and what was happening in your world on that particular day.

But one thing I must add my 2 cents on and that I feel very strongly about, is that censorship is not needed in any form for this list. If this is the first time in several years that I even might have been offended by someone’s post that is pretty darn good.

I agree with this Robert, you haven’t even begun to see rude, mean and demeaning posts on this list when compared to other ones I read.  Most become a battle of egos and the fur really flies.  And I think having someone believe they must resign from a list or be forever censored by the moderator, over a small, one time incident like this is just plain wrong. I do not like seeing a trend begin where one person can take offense at a post and cause another poster to be banned or feel they have to leave over one post. It would be different if the offenses were continual or every post was offensive or derogatory, but this was one sentence, in one post, one time.  I don’t think the punishment fits the crime.

Vicki Lambert

I'd like to reply to Diane Dennis's post about Asperger's Syndrome sufferers.

In 1997, I started a list for artists who had an interest in dogs. Albeit small, it was quite successful, and we all got along famously, with a weekly IRC chat to exchange ideas, techniques and anecdotes about our dogs.

Approximately, three years ago, one of the members, an Aspergers sufferer, made some remarks which had other members very upset. Knowing of her condition, I tried to mediate, explain and pour oil on troubled water.  However, her behaviour was repeated several times over some months in several different situations, resulting in a number of  people leaving my list in anger.

In the end, rather than arbitrarily tossing her out, I handed over the list to another moderator and left, as I was having some personal problems and was unable to keep dealing with the stress. From that point on, the list simply died.

Knowing of her condition and trying to allow for it resulted in the demise of a list which had been very helpful and fun for its members.  It was a moral dilemma for me, as I didn't want to penalize a woman for a condition that wasn't her fault, but when I called her on her bad behaviour, the list divided and the end result was, we all lost.

My question is, what would have been the right thing to do in that situation?  Hindsight (especially with the benefit of others' point of view) is 20-20, right?

Bev Hanna

Some agreements. Some counters. But one idea that has been repeated several times is that it's not a big deal because rudeness is enormously worse elsewhere. I think this is parallel to saying:

- it's OK that your child is bullied because some other bullying is far worse.

- it's OK that she's being harassed because some women are being physically attacked.

So sorry, but I don't agree with excusing a little rudeness by this comparison scale idea.

I think what we're all here for is ideas on online advertising / marketing / sales, presented with either hard evidence or a well thought out rationale to back them up.  With a good dash of mutual support and respectful interest.

Ideally, I would like to suggest that anyone refrain from using emotionally-loaded language that says anything negative about someone's character, motivation, level of integrity, etc.  LED is about information.  Being angry, snarky, dismissive, demeaning, or anything else along those lines is just not appropriate --- or useful. I'd also suggest it's REALLY inappropriate to fantasize about what someone is feeling or thinking, and then to start making comments based on that (as sometimes happens).

On the other hand, some people seem to think that zero rudeness, zero name-calling is too much to expect.  So if it is going to be OK for someone to be a little rude (as long as it doesn't go too far), then it is certainly OK for another reader to politely point out that they thought a remark was rude or inappropriate.

Michael Linehan, Marketing Alchemy

---

Written by Maty Matyszak
January 24, 2006

I've just got back from a week away and read the hounding of Sheryl Coppenger with mild dismay. Are the readers of the LED digest such sensitive blossoms that one strongly worded opinion sends them into shock? Frankly, if her comment is such that it causes lasting distress to a marketing manager, then I would sumbit he is in the wrong profession (though I note that it was others who complained on his behalf).

Maty Matyszak

---

Written by Michael Martinez
January 25, 2006

Sheryl's comment was far less rude than all the belligerant posts that have been made in followup.  She wrote:

> A forum can't be all things to all people. Everyone has some

> holes in their experience and needs some simple explanation

> occasionally, but IMO if a beginner can't get anything out of the

> discussion here maybe he should find a newbie forum someplace

> and come back when he's "grown up" a little more professionally.

For that, she was browbeaten repeatedly.  All the angst that ensued pretty much proved her point. No two people have the same standards of rudeness and politeness. One of the most rude, crass things anyone can do is to publicly berate another person for "being rude". Many Americans expect other people to look them in the eye when talking.  We instinctively assume honest people do this.  In Asian cultures, however, maintaining eye contact is rude.  You look down to show respect.  A lot of Asian people are treated badly here because of this simple difference in standards.

Most Internet bullying consists of people accusing each other of being rude.  It's always OK to impose your personal standards of politeness on others?  Not with me.  Respect goes both ways.  If you cannot respect the other person's unique point of view, why should anyone care about yours? If people are not welcome to speak their minds here without fear of being chastized and ridiculed for speaking their minds, then maybe it's time to put the LED list to bed.

50,000 minds do NOT think alike.  Privately, Mike Linehan expressed his displeasure at my "Get off the ego trip" remark in the site maps tangent.  And yet if Adam received a similar torrent of protests and Miss Browbeating replies about what I wrote, he opted not to subject the list to further tedious discussion of what people think is and isn't rude.

As Sheryl said originally, "Take what seems to fit your needs, and leave the rest."

Turning these discussions into finger-pointing soap operas because you didn't like the way someone said something is a huge distraction and a total waste of a lot of people's time.  That's just plain rude, in my book. 

Sheryl, if you're still on the list, you go, girl.  Keep sharing your thoughts but follow your own advice.  "Take what seems to fit your needs, and leave the rest."

'Nuff said.

Michael Martinez, Author

---

I've been following this thread with some interest. I agree with Maty Matyszak's statement:

> Frankly, if [Sheryl's] comment is such that it causes

> lasting distress to a marketing manager, then I would

> submit he is in the wrong profession.

Anyone who's been an employee in a company with big plans and/or big egos can remember shouting matches behind closed doors, after which no one was fired and everyone got back to work.

At the same time, I agree with Michael Linehan's remark:

> Ideally, I would like to suggest that anyone refrain from using

> emotionally-loaded language that says anything negative about

> someone's character, motivation, level of integrity, etc.

... because I know from experience that strong statements can sound *too* strong when delivered in print, rather than face-to-face.

<anecdote>
Early in my so-called career, I worked in a home office that supported the activities of numerous field offices. There was a typical HQs-vs-field mentality -- rational people left HQs for a field office, and within six months became drooling idiots running amuck, flouting all the rules. (Their viewpoint, of course, was that HQs had no idea of reality and expected them to build bricks without straw.) Every few days, someone got upset at the latest field "mess-up," and sat down to type out clear, logical, by-the-book instructions that no cretin could misunderstand.

Of course, their emotional state came through in their typing, and calmer heads edited the prose before it was relayed to the field. This happened so frequently, we developed a guideline: write your reply exactly the way you like, letting it all hang out. Then cut out the first paragraph (containing all the negative comments on the inbound message, the stupid things planned, the writer's ancestry, etc) and send the rest.

It worked -- the HQs writer got everything out of his / her system, the field office received a dispassionate response with clear instructions, and a respectful attitude prevailed in print.

</anecdote>

I'd like to follow both Maty and Michael's suggestions:1) develop a thicker skin, and 2) delete angry remarks; send only what's helpful. I'm reminded of Paul's instruction to the little church at Colossae: "Let your conversation be gracious and effective, so that you will have the right answer for everyone."

Don Baker

NSI Partners

Written by Leah Driver
January 25, 2006

I am a lurker here ­ I believe this is the first time I have ever sent an email ­ and like everyone else, I enjoy this  newsletter immensely.

However, why don’t we give the whole “rudeness” thread a rest? Everyone has berated Sheryl (which I believe is  extremely rude in and of itself), the list has apparently lost a valuable member and if any topic has been beat into the ground, this one has.  I have subscribed to this list for several years and can’t remember any problems prior to this ­ though I have seen posts I would consider much more mean-spirited than Sheryl’s was ­ and I think it’s safe to say that rudeness is not a problem here.

I know, by sending this post I am contributing to the very problem I am complaining about, but what do people want?  Sheryl is gone, the finger pointers should be content and I don’t see anything else to gain.

Thanks for the vent,