I do not know Andrew or Amanda very well so its not that easy for me,
and I tried to ignore most of the details whent he whole thing flared
up in the first place, but still my mind wants to reach conclusions.
Our brains like to do that, I think the internal filing systems demand
that judgements be made!

I came up with the following way of deciding to believe that neither
party is lying about what happened, or at least not lying in a
'calculating and deliberately at odds with what one knows to be true'
sense of the word.

Ultimatums and demands that will not be met, sometimes happen. When
this happens, when things break down and people walk away, its easy
for both sides to see it differently. If someone imposed demands on me
that I would not meet, then I could say that i had been 'forced out'.
But the person who made those demands could see it as me walking away.

I just dont think its true that any legal mattes that may happen are
going to be doing any of us any good. Does seeing marriage breakdowns
told in detail in court help me prevent my own relationships
faltering? Or does it put me off having the relationships altogether? 

Bottom line for me is that I dont expect to learn anything because
this breakdown and legal stuff seems no differnt to me than things
we've seen many times in the mainstream & non-internet media &
business world. The fact it was over rocketboom made no difference to
the rest of the plot. Massive amounts of 'interest' were generated at
the time, the mainstream media was all over the story just the same as
when bands or rappers or other celebs have public spats. 

I mean what shocking new revelations about how to conduct business
partnerships ar we expecting to uncover? I may dig up a list of
non-internet related entertainment/media spats in the past that have
loads of potential lessons for people, if there is a real intention to
have a useful debate about that sort of thing.

I could talk about wrestlers being classed as independent contractors
by their wrestling fed, and how the fed often trademarks the
performers 'on-stage' names to prvent them using the same character if
they jump to another show thats a competitor. I could talk about
record company talent scouts occasionally encouraging existing groups
to split or ditch members or management, come with us, you dont need
them, we'll make you a star. And I could talk about creative people
being trapped in contracts that suck all of the joy out of their
lives. Lets hope I cant be bothered :D

Cheers

Steve Elbows 

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Quirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It definitely has nothing to do with your level of intelligence or hair
> color.
> 
> You're right though, it was a judgement call on my part, as it is with
> anyone trying to decipher the truth from two opposing viewpoints. 
Luckily I
> know Andrew well enough to make that a fairly easy decision.
> 
> As for Josh and those that would rather not hear or read this
discussion,
> delete these messages.  No one is forcing you to involve yourself.
> 
> On 12/13/06, Amanda Congdon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   Hey Jez,
> >
> > We will definitely have a subscription option. Right now they have
one,
> > but it doesn't
> > support enclosures. This is my #1 priority.
> >
> > Oh, and Adam, you are right. You don't know me. And it's clear you
don't
> > Andrew very well
> > either. Interesting that you automatically take what he says as fact.
> > Maybe because I'm just
> > a dumb blonde.
> >
> > I'm with Josh. The lawyers will unearth the truth in the end.
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
<videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "Jeremy Rayner" <jeremy.rayner@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Good to see you on techie topics again Amanda, any chance
> > > the RSS feed could be fixed so that I can subscribe with fireant
> > > (Error parsing channel feed
http://blogs.abcnews.com/amanda/index.rdf )
> > >
> > > Ciao
> > >
> > > Jez.
> > > http://jez.blip.tv
> > > --
> > > Groovy Engineer
> > > http://javanicus.com/blog2
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Reply via email to