I know I'm not the most knowledgable person when it ones to Christian holidays, but can I still toss those sorts of people away for Lent?
Maybe that question is for a more religious listserv... On 12/24/07, Steve Woolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Depite some Inflammatory and knee jerk comments, it seems like a giant > > win for all concerned. > > > Brook, how can your livelihood being threatened by your professional > integrity being called into question be a win for us? > > We are out there doing this with no safety net. Our show depends on > its reputation, which was smeared without any questions being asked > beforehand. > > And for a community that champions itself on transparency, nearly all > of our critics have protected updates on Twitter, so we could not > participate or view the discussion happening there. Instead we could > see parts of responses and half-conversations, which included > name-calling. > > I notice that none of those people have the courage to repeat their > statements in public. > > Steve Woolf > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Brook Hinton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > Terry, Cheryl's post was not an accusation.. She didn't state anything > > that needed "backing up". And the post (how many times does this have > > to be said) wasn't about targeting Epic-Fu, they were used as an > > example illustrating how she COULDN'T know what was behind the product > > usage - in a post that was also about many other things that have > > unfortunately been lost in the subsequent discussion. > > > > This is basic, and important, media literacy stuff. > > > > The post SOUGHT the "correct information". And from Epic-Fu, got it. > > It also resulted in a change to the Epic Fu site that can serve as a > > shining example to businesses everywhere that want to communicate > > clearly and ethically about the issue, especially to a young and > > impressionable audience. They went from ambiguity to heroic clarity. > > Depite some Inflammatory and knee jerk comments, it seems like a giant > > win for all concerned. > > > > Brook > > > > > > On 12/24/07, terry.rendon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree an open discussion is healthy. But you also have to have > > > information to back yourself up. If you're going to make something > > > public have the correct information to back your statements up. For > > > example, if I was going to write a blog post tomorrow that I was > > > suspicious about how a presidential campaign was handling their > > > finances. Shouldn't I have some sort of information that backed up my > > > suspicion? > > > > > > Terry Rendon > > > www.terryannonline.com > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Jeffrey Taylor" > > > <thejeffreytaylor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > " If I were suspicious about how one is using advertising on > their show > > > > and I had some questions about it, I would privately relay my > > > > questions through an email to the right people and keep it there." > > > > > > > > > > > > She did. Cheryl clearly states in the video that she e-mail > Zadi and > > > Steve > > > > about it before recording. Cheryl made the vid knowing that > Zadi and > > > Steve > > > > knew about it. > > > > > > > > And the video wasn't just about Epic-Fu. > > > > > > > > Open discussion is healthy. We all keep saying things behind > > > people's backs, > > > > and it's good to air the dirty laundry once in a while to keep the > > > gossip > > > > and rumors from taking over, and to also resolve conflicts en > masse and > > > > perhaps even learn something in the process. This all has been a > > > good thing, > > > > and the way people have discussed has revealed more than the > discussion > > > > itself. I've been pleasantly surprised by some, sorely > disappointed in > > > > others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 24/12/2007, terry.rendon <terry.rendon@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I asked the question on the Hummingcrow post "Am I the only who > > > > > believes that most of the concerns brought up in this video > should > > > > > have been handled privately?" > > > > > > > > > > I have no problem with people giving criticism of others. It > helps > > > > > artists grow with when they get feedback, negative or > positive. My > > > > > problem with Cheryl's criticism, however, towards Epic Fu was > that it > > > > > called into question their business practices. Another > problem is at > > > > > one point she calls Steve and Zadi "slick, carefully > crafted," which > > > > > in my perception made it personal. In those two areas it > crossed the > > > > > line for me. > > > > > > > > > > If I were suspicious about how one is using advertising on > their show > > > > > and I had some questions about it, I would privately relay my > > > > > questions through an email to the right people and keep it > there. Some > > > > > would say I probably shouldn't even address it privately > because it's > > > > > really not my business anyways. If you don't trust something > on the > > > > > internet I think the best thing is just not visit the site > anymore. > > > > > > > > > > I know many new media people believe in total transparency. > However, I > > > > > believe there has to be a limit. There's always going to > someone who > > > > > is not satisfied the way you do things (especially if you > have large > > > > > audience) and if you have constantly answer peoples concerns > that can > > > > > turn extremely exhausting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jeffrey Taylor > > > > Mobile: +33625497654 > > > > Fax: +33177722734 > > > > Skype: thejeffreytaylor > > > > Googlechat/Jabber: thejeffreytaylor@ > > > > http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > _______________________________________________________ > > Brook Hinton > > film/video/audio art > > www.brookhinton.com > > studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab > > > > > -- Schlomo Rabinowitz http://schlomolog.blogspot.com http://hatfactory.net AIM:schlomochat
