One nice thing about blogging is that you get to correct what you write.
Tonight I put up a long post that I had second, third, fourth and fifth and additional thoughts about, and finally decided to kill.
I do that a lot, actually. Just not usually with stuff I’ve already put up. But I did it this time.
Maybe tomorrow I’ll have another go at the same subject. Meanwhile I’ll grab some much-needed sleep.
Some of us who take the RSS feed (and saw both versions) might just have enjoyed the first one 🙂
That said, I understand why it was pulled, and look forward to a more temperate (but hopefully no less pointed) version.
Thanks, Ric.
Whinging generally isn’t my style, and after a few hours of writing and re-writing, I cooled off and decided to let it rest.
I don’t know whether or not I’ll re-visit the topic. Might just be best to move on.
Quit frankly Doc, I read the long version, as my RSS reader picked it up. 🙂
It was very well written, well thought out, and a solid counter argument IMO.
I have your book, Intention Economy, coming today and have my original copy of Cluetrain out right now… going to read them both in succession.
Thanks, Joseph.
Right now I’m thinking of new ways to compress the case both Cluetrain and The Intention Economy make, rather than making counter-arguments to clear misunderstandings of both.
Curious to hear what you think after you read the books.
I’ve read Cluetrain numerous times… it’s the book that drove new thinking about business for me years ago (AND digital relationships with people as well)… I bought the 10th Anniversary Edition right when it came out, and have read it twice.
I’m reading it the 3rd time as I write this comment, so as to “transition” into The Intention Economy better.
Doc, you (and David, Rick, Christopher) were spot on with Cluetrain, I just wish more would have gotten a clue (pun intended).
As I always write on my blog, business is about people… which basically means that people choose to support businesses, not the other way around, and everything a business does, including marketing, should reflect that.
Thanks, Joseph. I think you may now have read both Cluetrain books more than I have!
That makes me extra curious to hear your response to The Intention Economy, which concerns unfinished work that Cluetrain laid out twelve years earlier.
No rush, though. Take your time.
So you’ve asked… so you shall receive…
http://intentioneconomy.blogspot.com
Where I will be asking questions and posing my ongoing “review” of your book… because this topic is THAT important Doc.
Feel free to participate in the conversation if/when you have time. 🙂
I just tried to post a comment and failed. I think. Not sure. When I hit either preview or publish, my text disappears. I’m using “Google Profile” while logged into Google on Chrome, FWIW.
Also, a suggestion: read through the whole book first. Because I believe some of your opening questions are answered in later chapters.
I’m not sure why your comment disappears, I knew I should have gotten a domain name dang it.
I noticed the pattern… so yeah, I’m reading the whole book first, then going chapter by chapter for the posts. 🙂 Thanks for the enlightening read so far Doc!
Dept. of Corrections – reminds me of the prison farm just up from the house. Dad would take us there for some of his unintentional/intentional life lessons. “Going to the prison farm, come along.” And we would go, watch him do an exam on someone being put in “the hole” and Dad would always ask the warden what the guy had done, strictly for our benefit. Good way to learn. Better yet, the warden would sometimes bring the inmates to the house for treatment, kind of strange when you think about it, Dad would bring them inside, put them on the counter above the washing machine and fix their ills. Asked him once if he was ever concerned about them coming back and doing harm or something like that. His response, another ‘life lesson” was “Treat people with respect, be honest, and you will get along fine.”
That’s what “Department of Corrections” triggered in me.
Thanks
Cuz’n Eric
Thanks, Eric.
I remember that farm. Is it still there? It was on the south side of the highway, with a tower next to it, as I recall. (I noticed all towers. Silly, but there it was.)
Your Daddy was the living definition of a Good Man. I still think about him often.
Doc, I read the post. I’m not sure I can say anything that would change anything. I could give you my analysis of the subtext I saw in it, but I have a feeling the result would be:
Me: [long post about business intrinsically not being the sort of relationship you want it to do, and more importantly, the external and internal negatives such advocacy]
You: Thanks, Seth, for your contribution.
So perhaps let’s just skip the length. There’s a huge mismatch between what you think business OUGHT to be, and what it IS. Everything else is elaboration on that point.
Minor example obliquely, refering to Eric – it is not true “Treat people with respect, be honest, and you will get along fine” – that’s even destructive, since if you’re treating people with respect and honest and NOT getting along fine, as many an abused spouse has had happen, it tends to lead to self-blame. The real answer in the case of Eric’s father is “I have the social protection of both the prison authorities, who are not known for being gentle forgiving types, and various violent criminals who have gotten benefit from me and can expect various future benefit. Anyone who harms me likely wouldn’t live long, and it’d be a race as to which side took out the perp first”. I’m not saying he wasn’t a Good Man, but that’s not what protected him, and thinking it was is all sorts of wrong.
Seth, there is indeed a mismatch between what business is and what I think it ought to be. That’s why I’m working to change it. If that fails, so be it.
Leave a Reply