and another thing: im not mad.
-
Joe Brockmeier (@jzb)replied to Jason Lefkowitz last edited by
@jalefkowit It is so incredibly hard to get people, *especially* those suffering from Founderitis, to listen to good PR advice. So frustratingly hard.
Mullenweg's continued insistence that he doesn't control the foundation/trademarks is also silly. No one believes that the other two board members are going to vote you out or oppose anything. It's a fiction.
-
J [email protected] shared this topic
-
Esther Payne :bisexual_flag:replied to Esther Payne :bisexual_flag: last edited by
@jalefkowit I'm so glad I went back to just doing HTML and simple css for my website than wordpress.
So much simpler and less worrying, especially now.
-
Jason Lefkowitzreplied to Esther Payne :bisexual_flag: last edited by
@onepict These are the moments when the really good PR people earn their money, because it takes guts to look the person who signs your paychecks in the eye and say "I know you really want to do this. I know you think you HAVE TO do this. But you shouldn't."
A smart CEO will take note when one of their advisors challenges them like that. But there are lots of not-smart CEOs, and lots of not-good PR people who are happy to let the boss set themselves on fire if they want.
-
S [email protected] shared this topic
-
Esther Payne :bisexual_flag:replied to Jason Lefkowitz last edited by
@jalefkowit each time it happens I cringe.
Even when I've been on the opposing side of a Campaign.
It's one thing when it's a small firm, but a large organisation, with investors?
Like can no one do proper crisis PR? Surely the investors can. Apparently not.
️ -
Jason Lefkowitzreplied to Esther Payne :bisexual_flag: last edited by
@onepict I've been wondering where Automattic's investors are in all this myself, because this drama can't be good for their investment. They profit directly from Automattic's central role in the community. If Automattic gets replaced or sidelined, they are the losers.
It's possible that they are quietly lobbying Matt, and he just doesn't want to listen. It's also possible that this all kicked off because they pressured him to start turning Automattic's central position into more tangible revenue. Who knows?
This will all make an interesting book, someday.
-
Grrrr, Darth Moose Sharkreplied to Esther Payne :bisexual_flag: last edited by
@onepict @jalefkowit Esther, if I ever do anything public ever again in my life*, and you tell me to shut up, I'm gonna shut up.
*v. unlikely
-
@grrrr_shark @onepict Everyone needs a person in their life who can tell them "you need to shut up right now" and have them listen
-
Esther Payne :bisexual_flag:replied to Jason Lefkowitz last edited by
@jalefkowit @grrrr_shark sometimes you can even swap roles.
Like sometimes I'm the person being asked to not post
. -
Grrrr, Darth Moose Sharkreplied to Esther Payne :bisexual_flag: last edited by
@onepict @jalefkowit Excellent - this is how communities are *supposed* to work
️ -
@jalefkowit @onepict of there is one thing I have noticed over the last four years, it’s that the investors value displays of dominance more than money
“If your company doesn’t squeeze the customers dry, another customer will. So if you don’t make with the squeezing we will find someone else who will”
On the card he’s getting scored on, he’s doing a bang up job
-
@jalefkowit a minor quibble. There is a modern narrative that Cnut the Great is misunderstood, and was making a point about hubris.
"Let all men know how empty and worthless is the power of kings, for there is none worthy of the name, but He whom heaven, earth, and sea obey by eternal laws."
-
Jason Lefkowitzreplied to Will Deakin last edited by [email protected]
@wnd I know. It's just a common metaphor.
-
@jalefkowit All that makes sense and I agree, but how do you publish a correction (as per the last point) without drawing more attention to the story or making it seem you’re agreeing with everything else?
-
@vitor You just publish the correction by itself. This will unavoidably draw attention to the story, so you don’t bother unless you’re correcting a truly serious error. You’re not in a debate with the publication, there’s no judge who will give you points for challenging trivial mistakes or areas of ambiguity. Arguing about those things will just make you look petty, so you don’t.
-
@vitor Leaving other things uncorrected doesn’t mean you endorse them. But you don’t have to go on record about every single thing in the world you disagree with.
If you’re really concerned, you can start the correction like “While we dispute many of the allegations made in the article, we particularly object to [ specific allegation ] because it is based on serious errors of fact.” Then you correct the facts — not the allegation, but the facts that underlie it.
-
Tim Ward ⭐🇪🇺🔶 #FBPEreplied to Jason Lefkowitz last edited by
@jalefkowit "If you respond to their agenda then they've won - it doesn't matter what you say or who was right."
-
Jason Lefkowitzreplied to Tim Ward ⭐🇪🇺🔶 #FBPE last edited by [email protected]
@TimWardCam Or as the old saying puts it, never argue with a person who buys ink by the barrel
