David Lasker
Chicago, IL
- 29 comments
- 56 likes given
- 12 likes received
Bio not provided
@yvettepistorio So cool to see the real you as your avatar! Now, about those superpowers? Congrats on being among the esteemed @ginidietrich #FF tweeps, and on your new job.
@ginidietrich That's fine. Dis my help, and after you've tried everything else, you'll be acknowledging that @DHLasker may have had a successful solution. By then, I may have even written a book, or two.
"If anyone has any ideas, I’m all ears." You know when a comment begins with a quote, and it's me commenting, @ginidietrich begins to consider regretting the quoted statement. Right?!
If the human dashes to sleep an hour earlier than currently scheduled, the human would achieve an additional 60 minutes of sleep! #Winning! Then human can offer wake-up announcements to said dog, potentially leaving dog wishing for more sleep. Soon dog will be sleeping longer hours, thereby allowing human to revert to previously scheduled sleep schedule and achieving additional desired sleep as initially requested. Thank you for reading another "Simple Solution" brought to you by media monkeybiz. And thank you for the gratuitous opportunity to plug. :)
Great approach. So much more meaningful, and leads to more meaningful connections.
MrArment ginidietrich deleted_91832_Sean McGinnis I was beginning to think that MrArment was the Remington Steele of ArmetDietrich. :)
How is it possible to discontinue saying "nothing" about nothing? Perhaps if the cool kids in the corner deleted_91832_Sean McGinnis jeanniecw Howie Goldfarb DHLasker banded together, again, we could collectively corner the creative commenting to reach Gertrude's goal of 300+ comments.
ginidietrich Lisa Gerber deleted_91832_Sean McGinnis jeanniecw Um, trouble maker? I believe that we are sitting in the correct corner, and having a blast! :) You know I know you'll eventually be joining us over here. That is why you put us here, "right?"
I'm beginning to feel a wee bit bad about the comments regarding the question @jennidooley asked, being preempted by the cornering of all this wisdom.
Almost a month ago, ginidietrich 's FB question of the week from NancyD68 is a great example of a "don't." In case you missed it, here's a link: http://www.spinsucks.com/social-media/facebook-does-not-mean-private/
deleted_91832_Sean McGinnis Where is @jeanniecw ? Perhaps she can join us in the corner too! Oh Jeannie!
ginidietrich deleted_91832_Sean McGinnis Hey Sean, how's it going over here? :)
ginidietrich I am. :) And, I so look forward to each and every afternoon!. btw, Hi!
MimiMeredith I was also shocked when I saw the number of responses at 176! Really? 176 responses, already? I only just saw cristerdelacruz 's tweet about the Seinfeld-esqueness of this post. That grabbed my attention. I love the enjoyment when posting or commenting about nothing. A person's writing skills can shine brightly in these cases. Or, a slightly edited version freestyle writing comes to mind--thank you college English 1 "O" something. I digress. Having fun with nothing is really quite fun. And then there's redundancy.
Now, about the changing of your title that you really want to talk about, and cleverly (or not) disguised it with a whole lot of "nothing." I have followed bits and pieces of the happenings (what you ginidietrich. have mentioned about it) and I applaud you and @DannyBrown for your creativity in naming your session. I enjoy the creativity you put into your blog and tweets! It is that creativity and fun that initially grabbed my attention and continues to keep my attention. It's cool too, that you spoke openly about it, and expressed your frustration (to put it mildly) over having to change the name. I am biased because I am getting to know you in the Twittersphere and through your blog (still have yet to meet f2f--when is @MerrittPR 's SMPotluck?) I am continuously impressed with your confidence and with ikepigott 's confidence in being bold with your creativity. It has provided me with new levels of confidence to be the truest me. I thank you both for that! :)
Yesterday after the details of this campaign were released, opinions began to form very quickly about how this was clearly a bad move for Facebook. Agreed, Facebook crossed a line that most people would not cross, and that many people find repulsive.
These actions beg the question, now what? Will this actually hurt Facebook in any way? Will this hurt Google in any way? Will you stop using Facebook? Will you stop using Google? How is this approach any different than the negative approach used by many political candidates during their campaigning?
Bad PR can certainly blemish a company's reputation. BP knows this all too well. In this case however, look at the tremendous attention that both Facebook and Google are receiving. Both companies offer unique products and services that are unavailable elsewhere. Regardless of motive, right/wrong, and intentions, I believe that the added communication (water cooler talk, blogging, tweeting, etc.) about both companies is ultimately a win-win for both, based on all of the exposure they are receiving. For example, the ABC produced program, NYPD Blue (aired a number of years ago) received a plethora of negative publicity due to content (language and nudity--full backside nudity) not necessarily appropriate for television during its time. It became a game changer when that very publicity grabbed the attention of the curious. Viewership subsequently increased significantly!
The real loser in this mess appears to be the PR firm who was thrown under the bus by its very own client. And, for agreeing to pursue the campaign. With the current economic conditions, I can also understand (not condone) the difficulty in making the decision to turn down work.
So cool to have friends that you can work with, trust, and be on the same page with in the direction in which the business is heading. I have enjoyed a similar opportunity/experience in one of my past adventures.
P.S. Happy Birthday, Lisa!
Ike tedcoine You're welcome, Ike. Thank you for your descriptive reply. Wow! Also, I would like to clarify that the only comparison between you and Ted that I was attempting to draw, is that you both have publicly posted your follow policies.
That said, you make some great points and clarify the differences in your policies, and while neither is the right or wrong way to proceed, you've both uniquely described what works for each of you, respectively.
I read your post about The Library in Your Friends List, and it's great! We've been there for years with a handful of vehicles to transport that information. And now, recommendations are so much easier to acquire. I can attest to using my electronic/virtual friend network for several recent recommendations. It's awesome!
Being in the news monitoring/tracking / electronic clipping service (without the scissors) business, my initial feeling was to get the word out to as many people possible. Those who work in PR/marketing/etc know about my industry, and those who don't are usually newly exposed to its existence. And much like the friend network, once a person is aware of its existence, they might pass the word along to one in need of such a service. That said, I do interact with only a portion of my followers, and Tweetdeck has been great for segregating those followers from the all friends list. And like Ted, I search for keywords that pertain to my industry, to assist where my services may be helpful.
Being new to tweeting (six weeks and counting--I learn something new every day) I have been following back almost anyone who follows me, that at minimum has a human generated bio, and human generated tweets. I described why in the previous paragraph. Like you, I see my policy changing any number of times in the foreseeable future.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I look forward to future interactions. And thank you ginidietrich for suggesting to follow Ike. <-- I tried to say that in my first reply, however my ambiguity made that less clear.
And, you're welcome Ike re my mention of tedcoine .
I think you're the third person to refer to me as DH (I started using it to avoid the comments about the internationally known shipper, and to be unique with using my first initial and middle name, as opposed to the initial of my last name) Oh, I also answer to David. :)
ginidietrich bdorman264 How cool is that, that your mom offers unconditional love, always. I can say unequivocally, that my mom also offers that unconditional love, even when we disagree. We've never been upset with each other to extent of not talking to each other. I love my mom for that, unconditionally. :) One of the greatest lessons I have learned from my mom, is when a person is being rude to me, shower that person with kindness, and in most cases, the interaction with that person has changed to be more positive. It works surprisingly well, when executed. And, sometimes it is too difficult to respond with kindness. My mom also made it possible, by example, for me to be a journalist, covering awful/gory breaking news and not letting my feelings get in the way of the job. Not necessarily good for the cache of emotions that were stored away and avoided during that period of my life, yet very good in being strong and emotionless when needed.
I think it's great that Ike publicly posts his follow policy. Tweeps know up front, what to expect. Ike's is only the 2nd of posted public policies (all about alliteration <smile>) that I have come across. tedcoine has the first policy that I ever saw, and read several weeks ago http://bit.ly/lcvbkG. Props to both of them for putting their policies out there. And, thanks for the suggestion to follow him. Hi Ike!
Wow! Your mom has had a tremendous positive influence on your life. So cool (but "sucky" while it was occurring) to have been taught to appreciate anything you wanted in life, while growing up. My parents had three of us under the age of four, I can only imagine almost doubling that amount in just about twice as many years. Holy extra super deluxe patience and potential "Calgon, take me away" moments. Props to your mom and her 5 aliases. :)
ginidietrich (insert before my previous reply) Sorry to hear that you encountered this uneasy experience.
Thank you. And while you can beat yourself up about how you handled the apology, ultimately, a person of understanding, a person who really cherishes a relationship, a person who knows and sees that the good in you far outweighs the apology, may be hurt, and will also forgive. It seems that a person who is less invested in the relationship will more easily forgo forgiving, and walk away. :( And, while that hurts, that action does speak loudly about that person's character.
Do you feel like she gave you an additional opportunity to re-apologize?
ginidietrich This is a tough one. The word "should" essentially says, "I should have done this, but I didn't." Even though the intention is there to say that you didn't do it, I also like to avoid saying the negative, like, "I didn't do it," or "I'm sorry for not doing that," and yet, the latter seems like it could/would (not should) be better accepted. "I didn't do it, and I'm sorry," vs "I should have done it (but/and I didn't) and I'm sorry." Very subtle difference. It does seem to depend on the recipient of the apology. I have been far more successful in apologizing when leaving all buts out of the apology. If/when the person is feeling better, they'll either ask why, they'll move forward, not caring why--just wanting to feel better, try to get you to feel what they felt, or something else. Maybe a happy medium is to ask if an explanation may be offered. At minimum, that give the recipient a choice to hear or not hear one.