Know-How Exchange : Just for Fun

To be perfectly honest, I can deny that a point of common knowledge, worldwide, would be good for mankind. That would be the case if no behavior or opinions changed as a result.

For example, we might share a common knowledge that the sun shines on the Earth every day, but not at night. Is that good for mankind? We might share the common knowledge that breathing is important to sustaining life/health. But if we don't change our beliefs or behaviors as a result, I'm not sure the agreement is "good for mankind." It doesn't hurt, but I also don't see how it helps.

Similarly, "teaching the world a word" is only useful if it changes something for the better. Simply knowing the word and its definition does nothing for us.

As for the help you request, I think we could come up with a plan that would "teach the world a word," but it wouldn't do much good if you don't have the funding to implement the plan. And unless you can demonstrate the value (of the objective), it's not clear why you (or anyone else) would want to invest in it.

Said another way, think about the potential benefit your target audience ("the world") would realize once it knows the word and its meaning. What might that be? How would people behave differently? How would it alter their beliefs and values? Is this something they want/need, or is it something that YOU want/need?

Dear Members

Tinker has emailed a number of us venting his displeasure and suggesting that we are party to censorship. I don’t agree with the accusation and perhaps it would be a good idea to prove it by reproducing any debate amongst us here. I replied to his email and to all the other members who he copied. For the record, here is what was written.

If any of the recipients feel it to be appropriate, perhaps it would be an idea to add their responses to this closed question and demonstrate just how little we desire to censor. Censorship is a serious allegation but it really should be differentiated from a desire to prevent a monumental waste of everyone’s time by answering “questions” which have little to do with marketing, much to do with promotion of personal belief sets and in any case, are probably not even questions.

Best wishes


Steve Alker

For the record, here is his email and my own response:

________________________________________
From: Tinker [mailto:tinker6@cox.net]
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 12:11 AM
To: Carrie Shearer
Hello people,

I am very sorry that I have to do this. (Yes, I do 'have to')
MarketingProfs will not act to correct the situation.
I have been the victim of a malicious negative branding.
It could be proved in court with the transcripts of the questions I have asked.
Bigot BARQ
This was in 'Tried Three Times', posted 3-23-09.
Posted by: BARQ
Member Response
3/24/2009 8:09 AM (CST)
Q: Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!!

Previously he said “The hand of God does work through me -- on my good days.”(Forward Progress, 3-3-09). That’s when he’s feeling self-righteous and thinks his perverted pleasure is God inspired.
He was responding to me saying that 'I saw the hand of God working through him’. He unintentionally helped me (I thought at the time), with the content of his slanderous attacks, actually confirming substantial facts of my presentation. That he had positive content in the negative assault was what I had considered the hand of God working through him.
At the time I was ignorant of the shrewd negative branding techniques being used. My ignorance allowed him to continue with me thinking, ‘no harm done’. I now know that you all were affected by the intake of his malicious propaganda. And it is most likely that you still see me as depicted by the negative branding.
There are some who have the same personal fears and insecurities and do support him. It is people of weak or nonexistent faith that have to attack and destroy anything that raises question to their beliefs.
The mission is seeking to secure the help of marketing professionals to change the “direction” of Society. There is no religious implication in the simple plan presented for that purpose. There is absolutely no intention to impose personal beliefs on anybody.
The negative branding has degraded the minds of good people. Facts and known elements presented for consideration are treated as if the dogma of a fundamentalist zealot, because of the negative branding.
I was banned from MarketingProfs when I was the one being wronged. There are a few who have recognized the efforts of the bigots and tried to help. I am asking for all good people to help make things right.
I bear no grudge against any human. The ‘actions’ of a bigot are disgusting, but I understand the force that affects the weak mind.
A congregation of bigotry would wear the label evil very well. If MarketingProfs supports bigotry…

peace & Love.
Tinker

PS Please feel free to respond.


Dear Tinker

I suppose that the English gentleman has always had a special place in his heart for the ascetic, the eccentric, the mystic and the jester. After all, our Kings created the idea of having posts for court fool, astrologer and other purveyors of incomprehensibility. However, I think that you misunderstand BARQ – nay, you fail to comprehend the deep philosophical and spiritual end of the universe he hails from.

You see, he quotes “Monty Python” and thus does not slander you. The great “Big Red Book” also entreats us to “Make £££ by selling lard to out of work actors – just enclose a crisp five pond note and the secret will be yours” What marketer could object to that, even if it did spawn the children of the devil otherwise known as MLM and now Internet Marketing Guru’s.

We are a tolerant lot and in our Fathers House there are many mansions. Well. I can’t go that far, but in my dad’s castle we’ve got more rooms than I’ve ever had time to visit and we once ended up renting one for free to a member of the Hare-Krishna set (Apparantly Grandpa was rather taken by his wifelet’s yoga and sex classes and thought that it would be one in the eye for the Marquis of Bath, who at the time was the UK’s resident no 1 aristocratic weirdo.)

Your problem appears to be that you don’t want to listen and don’t engage in debate. Despite all the words of peace, you repeat the same mantra time after time, regardless of what people comment on and you then claim to be misunderstood. There’s nothing wrong with that, and I enjoy reading your entries because I really do feel for your bafflement at the failure of the world to march to your step.

Your major problem, apart from failing to understand about 80% of members contributions and to bang on oblivious to the ideas they present, oh, yes, as I was saying, your major problem is in the questions you ask.

Some questions don’t have an answer, not because they are metaphysically difficult, but because they are not questions.

To paraphrase Monty Python: They are ex-questions. They have expired. If they were not nailed to their question mark, they would have fallen off their page. Here are two examples of non-question which are fed to second year philosophers to test their logic and first year mathematicians to see if they have a brain:

Q1: What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?

Q2: Assuming that God is all powerful and can do anything, can he create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it?

Answers I have seen have covered up to 47 closely typed A4 pages, with appendices, graphs and third order partial differential equations. The correct answer will solve most of your communication problems.

Yours sincerely


Steve Alker

PS Carrie or other esteemed members – would you forward this to Jeff as BARQ doesn’t have a public email address and I’m not about to broadcast it by accident!