Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 1

Wish I had a hanky store in Hampsterdam.

jps
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
And here I thought it was going to be something about Margaritaville.

rad
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4

And here I thought it was going to be something about Margaritaville.

It's going to drive us all there if it doesn't end soon.

But I loved this one on Nada anyway. This one just lumped Mycroft in with other business directional problems, as though he were not even a person at all, just some kind of bad investment decision:

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=14327549

What's Mycroft's ticker, anyway?

jps
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
Wish I had a hanky store in Hampsterdam.


Real class, Joseph.

Sleep well tonight.

Cheeze
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Real class, Joseph.

Sleep well tonight.


Yes, Joseph, after all Cheeze has suffered by not being laid off.

Then again, maybe jps is just hoarding sympathy for the next go-round.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5

Real class, Joseph.//Sleep well tonight.

Cheeze, I pronounce you to be in a state of ceaseless, humourless, dour permawhine.

What was this? A layoff? Or Jonestown?

jps
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
What was this? A layoff? Or Jonestown?

Judging by the absence of Kool-Aid jokes, it must have been a layoff.

You do have a point here, though. It's not as if 115 Fools got into the back seat of a giant limousine being driven by a drunken French Chaffeur, eschewed seatbelts, and crashed into a wall going 110 miles per hour.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
What was this? A layoff? Or Jonestown?


In other words, mocking people who have just lost their jobs is a really cool thing to do.

Knock yourself out, Joe.

Cheeze
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 13
Wish I had a hanky store in Hampsterdam.

Real class, Joseph.


I had the same thought. The exact same thought.

But then, I don't know the "spirit" of this board very well.

Although with this level of intellect I suspect it won't take long.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Although with this level of intellect I suspect it won't take long.

If only we all possessed intellects as scintillating as you think yours to be, goofy. But alas. . . .


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6

I had the same thought. The exact same thought. // But then, I don't know the "spirit" of this board very well. // Although with this level of intellect I suspect it won't take long.

How would it be possible for you to identify any level of intellect? Every post you make includes the subtext that all intellect is beneath yours. It all must look pretty puny from up there on Olympus.

jeanpaulsartre
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
jps -

What was this? A layoff? Or Jonestown?

Cheese -

In other words, mocking people who have just lost their jobs is a really cool thing to do.

Actually I read this as mocking people who have managed to hang on to their jobs and are now whistling loudly in the dark.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
But then, I don't know the "spirit" of this board very well.

Basically people here don't like pompous know-it-alls who are too full of themselves to relate to others. Due to the extraordinary circumstances of the past few days, an eerie tolerance has been exhibited. I do believe we are now reverting back to our true, spiteful selves.

Wish I had a hanky store in Hampsterdam.

Damn, Sarte! That's the funniest, most appropriate line I've read since this whole weep-fest started. A little humour-salted perspective at exactly the right moment. How do you come up with such things?





Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 28
In other words, mocking people who have just lost their jobs is a really cool thing to do.

I disagree with joey too often to even pretend to try and put words in his mouth, but I do not think that he was mocking the dearly departed. I know I wasn't when I asked if TomDave wore their Fool hats when they sh*tcanned the people.

No, what is being mocked is the arrogance of the Fool. There was much ridicule of those who did not “get” the new economy, you know, those of us who want a company to show a profit before we sink over $100 a share into it.

A new paradigm was proclaimed by a company that is now evidently scrambling for a pair of dimes. You overestimated which as I said earlier is not uncommon or all that big a deal to any but those whom were considered the fat to be cut. Damn shame for them, but you claim to be a business, so you should realize it happens sometimes.

You booted the handling of it, and now whine that we just don't understand. I worked for a bank that merged, something very common these days. Just after the merger was finalized the press got word that there would be layoffs later that day. Sounding familiar? Here's where you see a difference. The bank had prepared for the possibility of a leak, and responded with a press release. In addition, they moved up the axing form 2pm to 10 am. As these people had more business experience than just playing foosball, they had planned for a possible leak. In addition, within fifteen minutes of the good-byes, they had a message out to the public saying that there was a layoff, but service would not be affected, etc, etc. Oddly enough, they didn't try to lay the blame off on outside forces. If you depend on advertisers, don't bitch when they look out for their own best interest rather than yours.

Joey said that he would like to buy the hanky distributorship for hampsterdom. I would like to buy into the construction company that is building the bunker into which they are once again retreating.

Yes, Bogey, I realize that you can pull my posts and boot me, just like you told Scuba. Boy does that give me warm fuzzies. Almost as much as the assigning of blame everywhere but where it belongs, on upper management (I assume the Fool has some) who made a few bad calls. Again, there was no shame in the layoffs, but if I were teaching a B school course I would use TMF as an example of how not to handle one.

So, Cheeze, I don't think jps was making fun of those who were let go any more than I am with this post. Instead, we were laughing at the Fool's attempts to once again deflect all questions and criticisms. Keep up the wailing and gnashing of teeth about cruel fate, and someone will keep pointing out that the fault, dear Cheeze, lies not in the stars but in the Fool.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 11
Actually I read this as mocking people who have managed to hang on to their jobs and are now whistling loudly in the dark

My take on the comment as well. A glimpse of the best of board the last few days shows those let go as disappointed, yet optimistic. The ones still employed appear suffering the most. My guess would be that the trust they had in the Fool has been broken.

Two pointless predictions - the Fool employees still on board - within 90 days 5% respond to the uncertainty by voluntarily leaving the Fool for other work. The trust has been broken. Also, the discussion boards as they are today, changed to a subscription model with the fee based on the boards being on topic or off.

Now back to the pity party - anyone feeling pain for the bartender at Murphy's? Over 100 regulars no longer working down the street. His tip jar has to resemble a graph of Cisco's share price the last 5 days.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<What's Mycroft's ticker, anyway?>>


<NADA
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 13
<<Yes, Bogey, I realize that you can pull my posts and boot me, just like you told Scuba.>>


Ned, I appreciate you taking Bogey more seriously than I did. He could boot me. He could erase every sign that ScubaFool/ScubaSimpleton ever existed. Like I told him, Go ahead. Knock yourself out.

What I was thinking about today (while flying to Alexandria) was that if I had said to Bogey, what Bogey said to me, in a professional context, I'd be looking for a job. Kidding or not.

If Bogey wants to be treated with professional respect, he should show it and try to deserve it.

Personally, I would have fired the managers who got the company in this mess, not the employee victims. I would have then asked everyone to take a cut and put a shoulder to the wheel. Top management should have stepped up and made a financial commitment to the company and the employees.

The thing that shook me to the core when I toured TMF was the amount of money an hour the place HAD TO BE hemoraging. If I knew it in 20 minutes, a few managers with decision making power should have been canned.

My guide thought I would be impressed with the size of the staff. All I saw was negative cash flow.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
Scuba: Personally, I would have fired [JABoa remark: not sure whether Scuba means he, Scuba as Scuba, or as a big Fool] the managers who got the company in this mess, not the employee victims. I would then have asked everyone to take a cut and put a shoulder to the wheel. Top management should have stepped up and made a financial commitment to the company and the employees.

A few unrelated asides.

First, it's not easy to fire yourself. I know someone who has done it, in a way. This is a guy who got on early at Genentech and left, then started a couple of biotech firms. But once they got on their feet, he sold out. As the alumni magazine reports, he said, "I know how to start companies up, but I don't know how to run them." But this is rare.

Second, the $30 million in new VC would have only lasted a year at the old staffing level, if you figure a modest salary structure and say 100% overhead for everything. So with the 1/3 layoff, it will last a year and a half. I just don't think you could ask people to take a 50% hit on salary to last for 2 years and not 1. Not in Washington, and probably not anywhere, except if you are a fat cat. Plus your rates on overhead go up if wages are lower.

As for making a personal financial commitment, that has been done, but here it would be symbolic since the head Fools didn't cash in 2 years ago when they could have made out like bandits. The example I know about from history was the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway in the 1880's. The principals had gone to the Canadian government once too often for loans and grants, and the government was fed up. They, the principals, decided that if the railway was to go under, so must they in order to preserve their own self-respect, and so they pledged all their fortunes, houses, and so on, and were willing to leave wearing only a barrel and maybe a pair of long johns to wait out the winter. This may have turned the tide on their credibility but made little impact on the cost of completing the line.

One thing that has struck me is that 350 people isn't all that many people. On hiring, you would have thought that a head Fool would have been speaking in person to every single applicant on a short list before making a hire. I don't think that happened. My inkling that that might be the case is that often, when I wrote to a head Fool about something that I thought required his personal attention (and not regarding me, by the way), I got a reply from an underling. The explanation usually was that the head Fool was off thinking brilliant thoughts, or on travel to spread the gospel, or something. The underling wasn't all that under, usually it was Bogey. Nevertheless, an organization of the size of the Fool, either before the axe fell or now, deserves personal attention from the bosses, and I suspect that a lot was foolishly delegated to some true believers.

More musings later, perhaps, but I fear evil AOL is lurking, just waiting to kick me off immediately before I submit a longer message.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
<<One thing that has struck me is that 350 people isn't all that many people.>>


Compared to the population of New York, California or Pennsylvania, no. Compared to the payroll of GE, no.

Compared to what it takes to run most media type companies, it is a hell of a lot. The community produces more content in an hour than TMF does in a week. Most of what TMF produces is a restatement of press releases. Some of it has an air of analysis. Very little of it displays any original thought in the area of discussion. It is sort of like a high school report based on the Encyclopedia Brittanica.

The community produces a ton of material. Some of it is better. Most of it is worse. But not all.

When it comes down to material produced by TMF, especially for a fee, it has to be better than the boards at a minimum. There is some good analysis and a ton of lame analysis available for free on the internet.

You want the links?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
Scuba: You want the links?

No I don't. What I was trying to suggest was that the head Fools were maybe off being visionary while atherosclerosis was setting in, or at least some kind of fatty deposit. You expect fat in an organization, but not 33% fat, at least not if the boss is paying attention and union rules are not in place. And, the priorities on who got axed also seem to have been misplaced. But, who did the axing and why? (I don't mean axing at all, I mean which formerly warm bodies.) If this task was also delegated, you see another lack of attention.

My view of the site is skewed, because I have no interest in the investment aspects. Sometimes Elvis on Mars speaks to me about what I should do, but usually he doesn't. Be that as it may, I will go with Elvis. You probably know, Scuba, what fraction of the messages on the site are investment-related and what fraction "lifestyle". I don't, nor do I care. Except, if the failure of the investment part causes the whole site to fail. Then I'd care a lot.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<You probably know, Scuba, what fraction of the messages on the site are investment-related and what fraction "lifestyle". I don't, nor do I care. Except, if the failure of the investment part causes the whole site to fail. Then I'd care a lot.>>


I think that summarizes where most of "us" here are.

I only read the investment part for amusement. I'm not sure that's what was intended.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Dear ScubaSimpleton,

The thing that shook me to the core when I toured TMF was the amount of money an hour the place HAD TO BE hemoraging. If I knew it in 20 minutes, a few managers with decision making power should have been canned.

I was fortunate enough to tour Fool HQ about one year ago as well. However it wasn't obvious to me. Can you tell me the signs?

What I remember was a very barren place, with a bunch of tables and computers. I didn't see anything particularly fancy there. I do remember that they did seem to be anticipating more expansion, as they seemed to have a bit more space than people, but there was nothing like a fancy plant or an oak-covered conference room, and in fact I think I am sitting on a nicer chair than I saw there. I also remember being a bit surprised that writers didn't comprise a larger percentage of total staff, as it seems to me that it is a content place.

What kinds of signs made it obvious to you? (Not wanting you to disclose anything confidential of course; but I actually thought the place looked pretty spartan to me).

Best,

Lleweilun Smith
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2

My view of the site is skewed, because I have no interest in the investment aspects.

There are many however who did, and got burned badly, and it has occured to me this evening that these are probably the people who are having the easiest time of all with the concept of large layoffs.

Ironically, most of the people who didn't buy into RuleFaking all that much got laid off, and almost all of the true believers are still around.

jps
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 48
A compendium...

JJinLA
If only we all possessed intellects as scintillating as you think yours to be, goofy. But alas. . . .

jeanpaulsatre
How would it be possible for you to identify any level of intellect? Every post you make includes the subtext that all intellect is beneath yours. It all must look pretty puny from up there on Olympus.

Sorry to have offended you so. You told me the same thing, in quieter words, in private e-mail. Is it that I have disagreed with you about the reality of an ad downturn? Or now, that I noted the classlessness of your post about the "hankies in hampstertown"?

And, given the level of vituperative criticism I have seen flowing from your keyboard for the Fool, do you not find it ironic that when criticized it is you who react like a stuck pig and issue such personal invective hereabouts, even while you criticize them for their handling of criticism?

You told me "I didn't understand the 'spirit' of the place. Perhaps you are right. I came here to comment on a post which came up on the "Best Of" board, and was engaged in some other conversation about 'media', which is where I live and happen to know something about.

Others on this board have apparently found at least some value in what I have said even if you have not:

http://boards.fool.com/Messages.asp?mid=14320425&bid=111777&sort=username

My apologies for pointing you to a list of "recs", however here at 6:00 in the morning I am simply unable to divine any other objective standard by which some measurement might be made.

No one else, save you, jps, has told me "You don't understand the place", so, in effect "shut up". I have never reacted well to petty tyrants or dictators and I'm not likely to start now.

I'm particularly likely to respond to silly accusations and clueless missives like this one:

Not that it's worth thinking about, but--who would even be able to leak something to the press other than TomDave/Jeff? If there's one thing the Fool does well, very well, it's media placement.

Here is a partial list of the people who would likely have had advance knowledge of the layoffs:

Tom / David
Tom and/or David's secretary
The CEO
The CFO or whatever the equivalent is.
Their secretaries.
The Human Resource Manager, or whatever they might call that function.
The HR assistant.
Two or three people in accounting, who had to prepare to "draw the checks"
Someone at the law firm, to instruct on 'non-discriminatory' layoffs.
Someone's secretary at the law firm.
A management consultant, perhaps.
All department heads who had to decide who lived and who died. That may be 3 or 12, I don't know how the Fool is structured.

So I count maybe 12 to 20 people who likely had some fore-knowledge. It's difficult to tell a dozen people a secret and keep it a secret, as the other written example about the bank-layoffs in this thread demonstrates.

Could it have been handled better? Maybe. Do I think that the Fool is blameless? No, as I said here, "a management failure of great proportion"

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=14316124

I can't understand it either, but I doubt some privvied hampster would have been able to leak anything to the Post without the post writer calling TomDave to say "what's up, anyway?"

And those are the phone calls which are not immediately returned. The news first showed up on f****ed company.com. I doubt they bothered to call.

from elsewhere
<<One thing that has struck me is that 350 people isn't all that many people.>>

Compared to the population of New York, California or Pennsylvania, no. Compared to the payroll of GE, no.
Compared to what it takes to run most media type companies, it is a hell of a lot.


Perhaps. It is fewer than a major market television station is likely to have, and 90% of their airtime is filled coming down the pipe from the network.

It is fewer than a typical cable network, and (with the exception of the news channels and 'Food') 100% of that product is created by independent producers and FedEx'ed into the building.

It is far fewer than even a mid-size newspaper is likely to have, and a substantial amount of their product comes from the wire services and syndication companies.

350 sounded like a lot to me, too, but then they were running a radio show (probably slightly profitable, IMO), a newspaper column (maybe), research reports (apparently not), Soapbox (obviously not), writing books (?), and the Fool site itself. And without knowing what the revenue side looked like, I couldn't make the following determination:

The thing that shook me to the core when I toured TMF was the amount of money an hour the place HAD TO BE hemoraging. If I knew it in 20 minutes, a few managers with decision making power should have been canned.

In my tour I saw cracked linoleum floors, old desks and falling apart chairs shoved together without even the amenity of a Dilbert cube, a building far out of the high-rent district (well, as reasonably far as you can be given the city), and fraying rugs. An elevator from 1920, entire areas in need of paint, and I even peeked into the CEO's office, which, as I recall, was smaller than my bedroom. In short, a plant which was not impressive nor lavishly appointed. All I saw was "people", and, as I say, without knowing the "revenue" side, that's not enough for me to have formed any such opinion.

Still, the managers surely should have known that side. They were just enthralled with their apparently neverending seven year expansion and assumed it would continue unabated. It happened to a fair number of people in the past decade, entrepreneurs especially.

You probably know, Scuba, what fraction of the messages on the site are investment-related and what fraction "lifestyle". I don't, nor do I care. Except, if the failure of the investment part causes the whole site to fail. Then I'd care a lot.>>
I think that summarizes where most of "us" here are. I only read the investment part for amusement. I'm not sure that's what was intended.


Not originally, but it appears to me there has been a concious effort to build up "the lifestyle side". The "Best Of" board now contains perhaps 5 "stock boards" and 20 "lifestyle or politics" boards in the default position. If they wanted to concentrate on "finances" the default would be "Stocks A-Z". They showcase posts from those "other" boards in ever greater numbers in the "Post Of The Day" and "Hot Topics", all the better to recirculate audience (and thereby generate additional pageviews from the same people.) That creates traffic to "non financial" boards, and the cycle repeats over on the "Best Of" board.

It may or may not be "a mistake", but if it is "not conscious" then it certainly is an error as it changes the focus of the site as surely as expanding "letters to the editor" to half the magazine would change the tone of Newsweek.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<I was fortunate enough to tour Fool HQ about one year ago as well. However it wasn't obvious to me. Can you tell me the signs?

What I remember was a very barren place, with a bunch of tables and computers. I didn't see anything particularly fancy there. I do remember that they did seem to be anticipating more expansion, as they seemed to have a bit more space than people, but there was nothing like a fancy plant or an oak-covered conference room, and in fact I think I am sitting on a nicer chair than I saw there. I also remember being a bit surprised that writers didn't comprise a larger percentage of total staff, as it seems to me that it is a content place.>>


People. People elbow to elbow. People sitting in rooms and hallways. And as you said, very few writers. A ton of Admin and techies, but very few writers (for the size of the organization).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 11
<< JJinLA
If only we all possessed intellects as scintillating as you think yours to be, goofy. But alas. . . . >>

Goofy:And, given the level of vituperative criticism I have seen flowing from your keyboard for the Fool, do you not find it ironic that when criticized it is you who react like a stuck pig and issue such personal invective hereabouts, even while you criticize them for their handling of criticism?

My God but you are a self-absorbed little kcirp, aren't you Goofy?

"Vituperative criticism?" What the hell are you talking about?

Just who is it that is reacting like a stuck pig?

Do you have absolutely zero capacity for self-reflection?

I merely noted, in a single sentence, that your opinion of your intellect vastly exceeds others opinion of your intellect, and that you unceasingly exhibit your own high opinion of yourself and low opinion for others.

Mark Twain once said that good breeding consists of concealing how much you think or yourself, and how little you think of the other person.

You are about as ill-bred as they come, by that standard. If you have such a fragile ego, you shouldn't go around inflating it like a Macy's parade balloon and floating down the middle of the street.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 11
My apologies for pointing you to a list of "recs", however here at 6:00 in the morning I am simply unable to divine any other objective standard by which some measurement might be made.

And frankly, this rings false too.

Your rambling, unfocused diatribe already has 24 recs.

This board rarely has that kind of traffic, expecially early in the morning for us West Coasters who predominate. If your post has a point, except to reiterate your oft-stated belief in your own superiority, I fail to see it.

This looks like a simple case of rec-whoring to me.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 32
My God but you are a self-absorbed little kcirp, aren't you Goofy?

If you say so. Oops, that's exactly the phrase and the kind of biting sarcasm that got me in trouble with jps in the first place.

Of course I don't happen to think it measures up to "Every post you make includes the subtext that all intellect is beneath yours. It all must look pretty puny from up there on Olympus." But then I guess I'll just have to live with my inadequacies as a writer.

"Vituperative criticism?" What the hell are you talking about?

• "If only we all possessed intellects as scintillating as you think yours to be, goofy. But alas. . . ."
• "Cheeze, I pronounce you to be in a state of ceaseless, humourless, dour permawhine.
• "to blame advertisers for cutting back, and to not blame yourself for inadequately selling ads, is shocking, especially in public...
• "But if the Fool in its moment of doubt and pain wants to blame other than itself for declining ad revenue, all I can say is "what else is new"....

and of course the ever popular

• "How would it be possible for you to identify any level of intellect?"

Only the first of those belongs to you, the rest are from jeanpaul, who I'm sure is happy that I thought enough of his writing to go back and quote some of it.

Do you have absolutely zero capacity for self-reflection?

Of course not, I am fully able to evaluate my persona if appropriate. It is unfortunate that you have made me the subject of your rant, I only note that it is you who did so, not me. I was talking about "media", remember? I didn't post a tasteless pitiable remark about people being laid off, remember?

I merely noted, in a single sentence, that your opinion of your intellect vastly exceeds others opinion of your intellect, and that you unceasingly exhibit your own high opinion of yourself and low opinion for others.

And I am merely noting, in a single sentence, that you are entitled to your opinion and that my opinion of your opinion seems to decline with every post you post.

You are about as ill-bred as they come

Oops, there's that "vituperative criticism" you were asking about again. Have you any capacity for self-reflection, or should I continue to point it out to you?

And say, wouldn't this really be better if you went back to whatever it was you were doing before everybody's nose got out of joint?

Just wondering.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
<< You are about as ill-bred as they come >>

Oops, there's that "vituperative criticism" you were asking about again. Have you any capacity for self-reflection, or should I continue to point it out to you?


Goofy, your puerile rhetorical technique is to cut and paste fragments of others' work and then to attack the misplaced fragment as if it were a whole -- it is intellectually dishonest.

For example, the "you are as ill-bred as they come" which you quote was preceded by: "Mark Twain once said that good breeding consists of concealing how much you think or yourself, and how little you think of the other person. . . By this standard, you are as ill-bred as they come."

You capitalized the start of a fragment to represent as a whole, and ignored the thrust of my condemnation of you, which is your unceasing arrogance and inflated self-opinion.

I also note that your post received four recs within seconds, on a board that has almost no traffic this morning. This is an utter joke.

And I am merely noting, in a single sentence, you are entitled to your opinion and that my opinion of your opinion seems to decline with every post you post.

Seems to decline? Harsh words indeed. At least I can take some solace from the fact that you appear to be unsure.

OTOH, you are a rec-whoring farce, and your opinion on me or anything else means as little to me as the concept of integrity appears to mean to you.

You are little more than a glib little game-player with ego needs as vast as the Asian contintent. You need to present yourself to this board as superior, but I can assure you, no one here is buying, whored recs or not.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Dear Scuba,

Well, it looks like Goofy said what I was to say more eloquantly than I probably will.

I guess though I didn't (don't) know the extent of the Fool's reach. I did see lots of techies, but to be honest I don't know how many folks are necessary to keep a web site up and running. I think it is "a lot", as a friend of mine is a techie at AOL (yes, AOL is bigger than the Fool, but the principle is the same...)

Of course I don't know anything about the economics of the Fool, but I think that the "reports" aren't a bad idea. I've bought some, I do think that they provide some value (certainly relative to the several hundred dollar price tag of "professional" reports on Multex.com). It seems to me that the only costs are the writers. I had not heard of the print newsletter though. I haven't listened to Fool radio for a little while, I'm curious to see how it has evolved...

It could be a factor of the size of the organization, but the Fool has not done a good job of acknowledging my input. For example, when the home page was changed, the Fool asked people to comment on the design. This I did; I do wish the Fool wrote a quick note to acknowledge that my comments were read. Also, multiple times I have had emails asking me to join the Fool, though I think I have been a reasonably visible presence on the boards for a couple of years. I know that mistakes will happen in any organization, but "good customer service" includes acknowledging mistakes and some mea culpas on occasion. I will say that many of the writers have been very courteous in their comments to me, and TomG wrote me a very nice letter once.

I do think that the Fool should do a better job synthesizing info from and interacting with the community. I realize that PatG is a very busy man, but I do wish that he could talk on the boards sometimes, make him seem a little less "detached". Having said that, we in the community aren't always the most friendly/positive bunch - I hang out a lot at the Berkshire board, where it seems that entering with a "TMF" nick is an invitation to attack.

Anyways, I think I'm rambling at this point. Best,

Lleweilun Smith
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
Could somebody get a frickin' hose?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
Having said that, we in the community aren't always the most friendly/positive bunch - I hang out a lot at the Berkshire board, where it seems that entering with a "TMF" nick is an invitation to attack.

"Entering" is the key word here. The particular TMF attacks I have seen have occured when said TMF, who had not been a particularly active or contributing member of the community appears with the apparent notion that the community should subordinate its work and discussions to the TMF's work and topics of interest.

It's a social gaffe, a breach of etiquette.

Engaging the community is not "I could do this myself, but I'll be charitable and let you help me," but rather "Here's some ideas I have had. I notice that XX and YY have mentioned ZZZ before, but I am more inclined to believe WWW to be the case and here's why: ... Does anyone have any comments?"

Big, big difference.

--Boffo
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Could somebody get a frickin' hose?

My frickin' hose is already spoken for...

--Boffo
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
Sorry to have offended you so...

You start off badly. No, you're not at all sorry to offend me, and it's very transparent. Are you a compulsive liar too, or something?

...You told me the same thing, in quieter words, in private e-mail.

I guess it wasn't so private after all...what were you saying about "classlessness"? You must have been lip-synching something.

No one else, save you, jps, has told me "You don't understand the place", so, in effect "shut up".

No, no one else save me, you're right, and since then I've learned that the course of most wise men is not to respond to you at all. You got me on this one, I shouldn't have told you anything privately, ever.

Others on this board have apparently found at least some value in what I have said even if you have not:

http://boards.fool.com/Messages.asp?mid=14320425&bid=111777&sort=username


So, you're a Hampsterdam recslut. So? That's our audience that's reccing you, Mr. Deejay, not one of your own building. Me, I don't give a damn if two-thirds of them don't like this board, even if they hate it, even if they hate me--what I can see is, we have some sweat equity in the Fool too, and they recognize it, and wherever we go, they don't seem to stop reading us, and we've had a pretty productive dialog along the way even if it is rife with tension most of the time. If you think all those recs are what determines value and merit, then verily I say to you, you have your true reward.

I have never reacted well to petty tyrants or dictators and I'm not likely to start now.

Hardly a tyranny to be merely armed with logic and rhetoric and a keyboard. There are no marching orders here. While this is a space I did indeed create, it is also a space to which I'm vurrrry indifferent these days, and of course I don't have to be around you if I don't want to be. I do think that if there's tyranny present anywhere, it's in the [f]ool who is insistent on bashing into a community room with crashing cymbals and a ridiculous lampshade on his head and a sanctimonious attitude in his mouth.

I really don't like to get into smelling contests, and especially one in which the other contestant starts off as a reeking skunk. So just have whatever last word pleases you, and then lay off of me, if you can.

jeanpaulsartre

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
Of course not, I am fully able to evaluate my persona if appropriate. It is unfortunate that you have made me the subject of your rant, I only note that it is you who did so, not me. I was talking about "media", remember? I didn't post a tasteless pitiable remark about people being laid off, remember?

My rant? What are you talking about?

I didn't make the 'tasteless pitable' comment you are attributing to me above, or 90% of thsee referenced in your confused diatribe.

If anyone is ranting and incoherent, or has their nose bent out of shape, it is clearly you.

I like your suggestion about going back to what we were doing. Whatever self-proclaimed brilliant work you were doing, I am certain that you weren't gracing Martini Club with your presence.

I have reservations as to whether your bloated ego will actually permit you to retire gracefully, however.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
You start off badly. No, you're not at all sorry to offend me, and it's very transparent. Are you a compulsive liar too, or something?

Of course he is. He posts something to the effect of, "My posts here receive reccomendations, which is an objective measure of merit" and then emails or messages some sychophants, or perhaps engages some doppels, to rec the post so that it has 20+ recs before the habitual Martini Club poster is even awake. To top it off, he includes an ersatz apology for using recs as a measure.

The man is a farce, in terms of intellect, sincerity and integrity.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Dear Boffo,

Your point is fair. For that matter, one of my faves, Selena, seems to get much less attacking than many other TMFers, in part because of what you say (she is a fairly regular contributor). And heck, she's awful friendly :)

I guess though that I think the attacks are out of proportion to any missteps IMHO. I'm a newbie here, so I can't really comment about attacks of TMFers in this community. But one recent roasting came when Cheeze walked into the Berkshire board and asked for input on an upcoming Dueling Fool. It is true that many folks there don't care about the Dueling Fools; but I think that Cheeze honestly just wanted input from knowledgeable folks there, not necessarily wanting people to drop what they care about. Mycroft doesn't show his face on that board because he will be attacked if he does. He is exuberant, yes; and he changes his mind sometimes. He probably deserves some criticism! But again, he seems to be a gentleman (at least to me), IMHO he is getting an unfair rap in some places.

I never thought that I'd become a Fool apologist! I definitely wish that some of the more prominent writers (e.g. Verve) would stop by the boards and say "hi" sometimes. However I think that some of the guys are really trying...

Lleweilun Smith
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Your point is fair. For that matter, one of my faves, Selena, seems to get much less attacking than many other TMFers, in part because of what you say (she is a fairly regular contributor). And heck, she's awful friendly :)

There's plenty of other examples as well. The former TMF's Ralegh and Yorick (alas, I did not know him well) on the Berkshire and Real Estate boards respectively are the first that come to mind.

The reaction on the BRK board was knee-jerk - I'll agree to that. But it's a learned and not wholly unexpected reaction, IMHO.

To save this post from being pulled, I will reserve my comments about Mycroft. I will say, however, that my opinion of him was formed in his pre-Alexandria era.

Best of luck,
Boffo
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Dear Boffo,

I am definitely a big fan of TMFRalegh. I think I learned more from him than any single writer here. If there is one criticism I had of him, when starting out I was a bit intimidated (he can be a little, well, short to questions sometimes). I wish they could have found someone like him for the Boring port...

I have heard good things about Yorick as well; I heard he was the person to talk to about REITs. I never really ran into him though...

Without meaning any disrespect to the TMFers in place right now, I am sad that many of the "analytical" TMFers (e.g. Ralegh, Nexus, Seymor) have left. What I liked about them is that they were very "free-form" as far as analysis goes. Dale W. would for example define a set of metrics for analyzing banks, use them, and explain their limitations; some of the other writers take a certain set of metrics (e.g. Rule Maker), then say why company "X" does or does not fit these metrics.

Best,

Lleweilun Smith
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
You start off badly. No, you're not at all sorry to offend me, and it's very transparent.

You are seeing castles in the air. I am sorry to offend, however that doesn't stop me from doing so when I have what I believe a legitimate criticism to offer.

I'm sure David Gardner didn't like hearing that I thought the layoffs were proof of a significant management blunder either (assuming he ever saw it, which is unlikely), and if he was offended, then I am sorry, but it's what I feel.

..You told me the same thing, in quieter words, in private e-mail.

I guess it wasn't so private after all...what were you saying about "classlessness"? You must have been lip-synching something.


I thought about that. There was much in the e-mails which I did not discuss, and that particular point you had also launched at me in public, just not with the specific phrase which you found offensive, the "If you say so..." line.

Accept my apologies for the breech, if you think it egregious.

So, you're a Hampsterdam recslut. So? That's our audience that's reccing you, Mr. Deejay, not one of your own building.

I beg your pardon. I believe it is the Fool's audience, which they are allowing you to play with. When you call a talk show it is the station's audience, not the host's, and when you write a letter-to-the-editor it is the magazine's audience, not the editor's - even though the host and the editor play an important role.

Did I build "the audience"? Of course not. I never said otherwise.

If you think all those recs are what determines value and merit, then verily I say to you, you have your true reward.

No, they are a mere signpost, often insignificant. I frequent several boards hereabouts. I am the resident curmudgeon on the Excite@Home board, and my posts rarely get recommended there. So what? I have opinions and I state them forcefully, too forcefully for some I-am-my-stock readers' tastes. C'est la vie.

While this is a space I did indeed create, it is also a space to which I'm vurrrry indifferent these days, and of course I don't have to be around you if I don't want to be.

Of course not. You have it in your power at any moment to make me vanish. You probably wouldn't be the first. Or the second.

I do think that if there's tyranny present anywhere, it's in the [f]ool who is insistent on bashing into a community room with crashing cymbals and a ridiculous lampshade on his head and a sanctimonious attitude in his mouth.

So if I understand this correctly, someone who comes in with contravening opinions and calls "tastelessness" "tastelessness" has a sancimonious attitude. OK. Just learning the ropes, here.

So just have whatever last word pleases you, and then lay off of me, if you can.

Don't be coy; of course I can and happily will. Unless and until you post things which are silly, in which case I will offer my opinion. That's how these boards work. You talk. I talk. You don't have to listen, but that doesn't mean I have to stop offering my opinion to others who may be interested.

I will also continue to read your posts, and offer my recommendations when I believe them to be in good odor, and hopefully engage in discussion when it is appropriate (as now, methinks). I particularly recall the one which ended "The Fool needs to sell more ads", the thrust of which was that the Fool, by discussing alternate business tactics and models at the moment, appears to be directionless.

While I believe that to be a bit of an oversimplification (easy enough to do on a simple message board, to be sure), there is merit to the argument, and I clicked on the 'rec' button. I suppose I could have written another post saying "Me too", but in Internet School they told us that was bad form.

I've enjoyed some of your other writings, and disagreed with others. Am I to agree with everything? I haven't disagreed with everything, if that's what you're thinking. I called the "hankys" post tasteless. I haven't changed my mind.

I also particularly liked WonderPup's 4 point analysis, and have little to add, except that I thought his "3-month" time-frame a bit dire.

However if it helps, "Me too."
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
Goofy said:
I beg your pardon. I believe it is the Fool's audience, which they are allowing you to play with. When you call a talk show it is the station's audience, not the host's, and when you write a letter-to-the-editor it is the magazine's audience, not the editor's - even though the host and the editor play an important role.

I disagree with this. If a particular caller calls every day and the radio host allows the caller time on air, the caller can develop his own crowd of fans and haters. Howard Stern has done this with several of his "WackPack" circus freaks. They start their own careers.

This is a better model of the boards than presented by you, Goofy. Some boards belong to a large group of posters, other boards are more tightly focused by a ringmaster. Just like anywhere else on the net, it's best to read before jumping in. It's very possible to breach board customs without doing so intentionally.

Rick
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
This is a better model of the boards than presented by you, Goofy. Some boards belong to a large group of posters, other boards are more tightly focused by a ringmaster. Just like anywhere else on the net, it's best to read before jumping in. It's very possible to breach board customs without doing so intentionally.

Especially when you are a egomaniacal Hampsterrec-whoring freak.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2

If a particular caller calls every day and the radio host allows the caller time on air, the caller can develop his own crowd of fans and haters. Howard Stern has done this with several of his "WackPack" circus freaks. They start their own careers.

Not only that. On the Internet, unlike on radio, users own the experience more than companies own the site. What this means in California is that in an interactive environment, nobody "owns" any one place, and nobody can really own a particular "frequency", because the greater degree of ownership is of the user's experience. The degree to which a site is interactive (good thing) is the degree to which it is communal, and on good sites others can pass freely, as they like. The Internet is like everyone with their own mike broadcasting and antenna setup at once, no matter the URL. And the sooner you own up to this reality, the better for you, your business, your site, whatever.

laop
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Not only that. On the Internet, unlike on radio, users own the experience more than companies own the site. What this means in California is that in an interactive environment, nobody "owns" any one place, and nobody can really own a particular "frequency", because the greater degree of ownership is of the user's experience. The degree to which a site is interactive (good thing) is the degree to which it is communal, and on good sites others can pass freely, as they like. The Internet is like everyone with their own mike broadcasting and antenna setup at once, no matter the URL. And the sooner you own up to this reality, the better for you, your business, your site, whatever.

... and that, my friends, is how to kill a thread that has been begging to die.

h
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

What I remember was a very barren place, with a bunch of tables and computers. I didn't see anything particularly fancy there. I do remember that they did seem to be anticipating more expansion, as they seemed to have a bit more space than people, but there was nothing like a fancy plant or an oak-covered conference room, and in fact I think I am sitting on a nicer chair than I saw there. I also remember being a bit surprised that writers didn't comprise a larger percentage of total staff, as it seems to me that it is a content place.


You would have seen more capricious activity had you not had the cleaning lady night shift that day.

jps
Print the post Back To Top