-
Website
http://www.rikinontheweb.com/ -
Original page
http://www.rikinontheweb.com/brazen-faith-david-dellifield-of-ada-ohio-is-a-good-guy -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Let me disagree with other points of your post:
1) I had some criticism towards Brazen too, and emailed them to Ryan. We talked about it. Privately. You shouldn't bash a community without name specifications, because you are trashing everyone that belongs to it. Generalizing is NEVER the right choice. Ever. And hey, i'm not even a Brazen member, so i'm not defending them, but i am saying how i would approach criticism towards a community.
2) I'm guessing that you and me, are different kind of bloggers than Penelope, or Holly Hoffman for example. The thing about them is that they are authentic. They are personal. I don't think we are. We blog about different things. And that's something we have to understand, specially when the blogger has such popularity and so many avid readers (and defenders) like PT does. I think her post was wrong, but it still was authentic. I think i saw @junelin agreeing and loving her post. And that's ok. That's what her readers want from her. Authenticity, at it's core. They want her writing happy, angry, sad, w/e. And she delivered once again.
3) Public doesn't mean free. Yes, she took it too far. But hurting feelings should come with a price, offline and online.
That's it. I'm not unfollowing you or stop reading your blog man! Don't be so drastic. I think it's great for you to put your thoughts out there, but be careful of who you talk about.
Hope to see your next post soon. Take care.
Beyond that, it's juvenile, yes, but it's also unfortunate though, because if you take away the personal attack, I think the premise of her post was a good one: the "drive-by" negative comments from people who don't have the same perspective.
And thanks for reading! I just found yours (via Carlos) and added it to my reader as well.
This makes me like the blogosphere a little less. Why all this bickering and fighting and attacking people? We don't have to attack a person especially if we know so little about them.
And you're absolutely right that there's alot of fighting going on but I don't see it stopping. I'm pretty sure I'll just get better at filtering it all out with experience.
I think Penelope's reaction to this was ridiculous - and like you, it's sort of made me lose faith in her as a blogger. I know she is good at what she does, but all she has done is personally attacked him on a platform of people that will support her and back her up. It's cowardly and childish. She posted something controversial on a public forum - someone disagreed with her - so she tracks him down, finds his phone number, and, for lack of a better term, stalks him? That's beyond ridiculous.
It seems that overall, people REALLY don't want to take criticism. They say they do, people say they want to encourage discussion on their blogs and social networking sites, but as soon as people do they get all flustered and become close-minded. I mean, what's the point of blogging just to have everyone agree with you and praise you, honestly?
If you're putting your thoughts out there for everyone to see - offering YOUR opinion - you HAVE to be willing to take in others as well. Learn and grow from it, don't shut down and shut it out.
Thank you for posting this Rikin. More of my thoughts here: http://www.lifewithoutpants.com/blogging/rule-1...
Where is the opinion in "I'm bored"?
Where is the opinion in "send your unwanted kids to OH"?
One is a statement about the self. The other is a judgment about someone else.
I actually signed up with BC recently and was surprised to see in my "welcome" email the following statement: "Become a Brazen Blogger: If you are in the age range of 18-30...". Really? REALLY? You think age has ANYTHING to do with "defining your career" or "controlling your life"? Wow. BC calls itself "the top destination for young professionals". Apparently I'm neither young nor a professional. ;) (I'll be 32 soon.)
I haven't quite gone through the whole site yet, so there maybe something that explains the reason, but for now I'll file this under "Disappointing".
Like I said in my social media post, I don’t agree with Scott Monty, but I respect what he does. I don’t agree with Ann Coulter either. But you have to admit, she’s good at helping others learn about themselves through voicing her own opinions.
You’ve only been blogging a few months. Wait until you write something a little controversial, and then do that over and over again, and get slammed over and over again. Penelope is one of the best people I know at taking criticism. She has taken and dealt with immense amounts that none of us will probably ever know.
But not when it’s a personal attack. Should we have to deal with that kind of abuse as a blogger? If so, I don’t want to blog.
That’s my two cents. Thanks for the post and opinion!
You respect Penelope but if you were on the receiving end of her tirade you would no longer want to blog? I respect her accomplishments but respecting her as a person is completely different.
I know I've only been blogging for a few months but I hope that as I gain more experience under my belt that I don't create some self-absorbed notion that I can publicly demonize someone who I barely even know just because of 140 characters of nonsense.
I'm going to paste my comment from Matt's post since some of the same issues are coming up.
I agree that some things are morally right and wrong.
In this case, I think David was the example Penelope used. I don’t think it was personal. She used David as the face for all the other individuals who make such statements. David = jerks. It’s easier to identify with a specific case or person than large sweeping generalizations.
Nonprofits, as I’m sure you know, do this all the time to plead their case. Instead of saying donate food for the hungry, they introduce you to Sara who has a daughter and just got laid off.
Penelope attacked his opinions, not the man himself. And in the meantime, she also laid out quite honestly the struggle we all feel when we’re attacked ourselves. I think that’s scary for a lot of us to see that because we wish we were all better, but it doesn’t get better unless you talk about it and engage in dialogue and put yourself out there.
If her sole intent was to depict her struggle dealing with personal attacks then she could have easily used a faceless scapegoat like the 'Sara' in your example to do the job. It might not have been as effective in getting her point across but at least the effects would not have been vindictive. Sensationalism works.
By making her title "I hate John Doe – the one who lives in City, State" she made it 100% personal.
I felt really passionate about getting involved in this discussion. I'm really sorry I'm late to the party, but glad to see that so many members of Brazen have read and commented already.
I think Nisha said it best. The Community expands far beyond Penelope, Ryan and I. There are tons of people, and you're probably not going to love everyone. But based on this post and your comments earlier on Twitter, it seems like you've already found a quality circle. That makes me happy :)
I would recommend reaching out to Penelope directly if you feel that what she did was wrong. She responds to all of her emails, especially people in the Brazen Community. If she doesn't, tell me! But I'm positive she will.
@Chaalz: I'm sorry that you were pissed about the 18-30 thing. It's frustrating to me too since I frequently run into bloggers over 30 who are pretty amazing.
The only restrictions we have for people over 30 is that we can't currently syndicate your blogs. But there are plenty of ways to brand yourself and interact on the site without being a syndicated blogger. And there are more ways coming REALLY soon. Stay tuned.
Drop me a Private Message on Brazen when you get a chance and I can help you get involved with the community and answer any questions that you might have about how the community works. That also goes for anyone else who is interested in participating ... age holds no bearing.
Cheers!
-RP
Thanks for coming by, I really do appreciate that you guys are actively involved in the community even when some of the its members seem to be biting the hand that feeds. I'm not flattered that the first comment on my blog from you (and Rebecca) is in regards to this topic but I guess I'll take what I can get. I also understand that Brazen is much more than its founder but you have to be short sighted not to see that a founder's actions represent the company to a certain extent as well. Apple/Steve Jobs & Microsoft/Bill Gates are huge examples of this even though they're on a different level.
I'd rather not reach out to Penelope via email to be honest as this is just my opinion and doesn't need to get personal. In fact, as critical as I have been I don't think I attacked her personally at all. I respect PT for her accomplishments as a writer and for starting Brazen but I don't agree with her specific actions in this case and for that I lost respect. Penelope is welcome to come here and comment on my post as I did on hers.
I personally am trying not to have an opinion since I'm not a parent and have no clue how stressful that can be :)
Either way, thanks for writing this post.
-RP
There is nothing wrong with venting online about how one shouldn't do x, y, and z on Twitter or in blog comments, but to list this guys' name and hometown, and to track him down and challenge him on his work & home phone, (and she said she nearly shared his phone numbers too!) makes it very personal. And she specifically uses the word "hate." That's not what I'm here sharing my thoughts online for, I'm here to establish new relationships and grow personally. It has made me have second thoughts about contributing to the BC community also.
I think this behavior for Penelope is most destructive because she has a huge community of twentysomethings that look up to her as a role model, and this is what she's teaching them to do. Not cool. Keep challenging the status quo Rikin! Thank you.
I really wish I was a fly in the wall over at BC today. Maybe Ryan Paugh could describe it more.
Rikin
But if people want to talk about this I'm happy to. Either here, or privately on the site.
-RP
I also like your brief point about Kawasaki, where the strategy is not unlike that of Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian - bad publicity is still publicity, and infamous is just as good as famous. I really wonder if the web and social media is facilitating the spread of bad taste sometimes. I cringe as I write these words, because if attention is what PT was going after, she's certainly getting enough of it.
But back to the issue on hand: have we merely moved the follow-the-leader mentality from the offline world to the online world? In your view, how can we keep the blogosphere more honest? Is there no barometer to measure objectivity and integrity on top of pagerank and traffic?
In regards to GK - his social strategy is strange but he is one of the founders of Apple and for that I respect him. His entrepreneur efforts online haven't been the most stellar but at least he's not just sitting on his money and not trying to do anything.
I used to be a member of the Brazen Community - I left for reasons *completely unrelated* - but had I still been affiliated, Penelope's post would have given me pause.
In *know* that Penelope does not define Brazen, as Nisha points out. But she is part of the package - and her actions should reflect the ethics and flat-out common decency that Brazen strives to uphold. And if her actions cannot, well then, she shouldn't tell us all about it in her blog.
Thanks for writing this one.
I'm making the addendum because I don't want to assume anything, here.
For example, you respond personally to most of your commenters, and if you ignored 90% of your commenters, you would be rude. On any given day, more than 90% of my commenters hear nothing from me, but I am known for actually being very engaged in my comments section.
That's an example of how the rules are different.
Another difference is the level of criticism I field. I have been on CNN getting slammed for blog posts. I have written posts on Yahoo Finance that received more than 500 comments, most of them not just negative, but imploring Yahoo to fire me. My Wikipedia page is often on lockdown -- as in all edits must be approved -- because people write such offensive commentary on it.
So I am operating under a very different set of rules than most bloggers for what is fair game for criticism. In general, I would say I put up with most of it. I can generally tell when I'm going to get slammed on television, and I do the interviews anyway. And I leave up so many absolutely offensive comments on my blog that commenters actually complain that I should delete more.
This brings me to, what are the rules for responding to people by name. I understand that I have a lot more power than David Dellifield, and when I put his name in a title, I affect his Google search results for a long time. I did that to make a point.
Women put up with much more harsh criticism than men do online. This is not a controversial assertion -- it is reported in the New York Times and studied at the university level. Men are more rude to women than other men online. So it would be remiss, I think, to squander the power I have online. I have a lot more power than most of the obnoxious commenters of the world. I can use that power to let people know that they cannot be rude and offensive with impunity.
Additionally, if people can say anything to me -- even on my own blog, since I allow almost anything -- then I should be able to say anything back. This is what real conversation is. You need to know that if you are having a conversation online with a blogger with a big audience, then the conversation will be heard by more people. That's what social media is about.
This leaves the most common complaint: That I called his house and his work. I have found that in general, high-profile bloggers are very cognisant of the fact that their blog carries more weight than other peoples' blogs, and they are careful what they blog about because of that. This is true for me, too. For example, you never know the names of the men I date because it would destroy their Google search results, and I dont' think that's fair. The other thing I do, because I'm careful, is that I make a phone call to complain to someone instead of using social media. Because for me, anything in social media is a huge broadcast. I called David because this is what I'd do if I had a problem with anyone online -- I would take it offline to make it private. The problem is that after I tried to privately contact David, and told him that my feelings were hurt, he said a second, hurtful thing.
I have a lot of experience dealing with people who think I'm an idiot. Almost universally, if I contact someone directly, they become more human because I am more human, and their criticism is less sharp. David's criticism became more sharp. At some point I need to draw a line and say that people cannot rip on me endlessly. I am a person, with feelings, and I can choose who I want to respond to and when. If I am endlessly irresponsible, people will stop reading me. If I am endlessly a doormat, I will be doing nothing to contribute to an authentic conversation online.
Thank you for coming by and offering the other side of the story. The blogging world is definitely hierarchical and I can understand that out of necessity your behavior is inherently different than mine or any other average blogger. I still think that rules of morality and decency apply to us all - though they're individually defined - and hopefully one day if I am ever at your level of exposure I can say that I upheld my rules throughout the journey.
I also agree that, "if people can say anything to me -- even on my own blog, since I allow almost anything -- then I should be able to say anything back. This is what real conversation is." Where I disagree is that I don't think you had a 'real conversation' with David to get his side of the story. Regardless, you also attempted to offline and involved his wife unnecessarily. I don't see how you can justify reaching out to his wife simply because they share the same home phone number. Just because he mentioned his wife I wouldn't assume that she had any part in his response to you. It just seemed over the top to get her involved. Would you reach out to his parents for raising a boy without any manners if you could?
Matt also makes a good point and since there's a lot of copy and paste going on I'll do the same: "After all the criticism you’ve taken, David, a relative unknown in comparison to the CNN’s and Yahoo’s of the world, makes one snide remark on Twitter - and it turns into this? You go above and beyond what anyone I know would do to ‘get him back’ for being a jerk?" I think that many of us feel that David's actions and relative lack of 'status' didn't warrant the response he received. We could probably go back and forth on this all day because like you said there's no right and wrong. What can't be denied is that this whole spat at least showed us the effects of taking one path. Some of us will be encouraged and others will be discouraged to follow it . I still stand with the latter group.
The role of gender in this whole debacle is something I try to stray away from because obviously I don't know what it's like to be a female and a mother. However, I think there may have been better ways to set an example, as a feminist, in such a situation. No male or female should be mute and defenseless when personally attacked but when someone throws a punch you don't take out the guns, so to speak. Maybe you think that what you did was fair and justified but I still simply can't see that.
Finally, I understand that you have a relative high amount of power and I respect all that you've done to achieve it. I think Brazen Careerist is a great community and the best I've joined so far even with all of its flaws. I think your writing and your track record speak for itself - impressive and controversial at the least. No one gets to where you are without stepping on a few toes whether intentionally or not. I just think some battles aren't worth fighting. I'd much rather read about your actual advice and learn from your experiences than see you intentionally haze others in an attempt to make a point. A point that I don't think came across to all of your readers.
Thanks again for coming by. I'm not happy that this was our first way of introduction but I hope you can at least understand where some of us are coming from.
Best,
Rikin
Penelope, you yourself and you alone, have caused a person to think you're an idiot. Namely, me. I never heard of you before this week and I certainly will give absolute zero credence to anything you have to say about life, careers, parenting....anything at all in fact, regardless of your credentials. Based on that one post of yours you have defined yourself as...well, I don't have a polite word to say what I really think, so...a psycho. A crazy stalker bitch. You say that men criticize women more harshly? Gee, I wonder why that would be your experience? Could it be that your over-the-top, insane, scary, stupid, ridiculous, unbelievable, oh and did I mention INSANE?!? response to a negative TWITTER (for gods sake!) simply reinforced in many lumpheaded males idea that we are silly and ridiculous and stupid and INSANE!!!! women?
On behalf of we once-and-future bloggers, working women and moms: thanks SOOOO much for the boost in our credibility. (please note sarcasm) As if it wasn't already hard enough over-coming these stereotypes.
If you call me at work, I will put you on speaker phone and my colleagues and I will laugh at you. If you call me at home, I will turn on the answering machine and record you and I will press charges for stalking and harassment.
Rikin: this was an excellent blog post. You I will return to read.
the language a little more kosher next time if you could though. I agree
completely that Penelope really has not made it any easier to put some of
our stereotypes and gender misconceptions to rest. I just don't know what
will anymore to be honest. I have yet to hear anything new and fresh when it
comes to the topic of closing the so called "gender-gap".
I admit I found the BC post funny, from the standpoint of simple carnage. But really, this issue seems pretty simple: from an internet-level perspective, this David dude is six inches tall, and Penelope is a thousand feet tall. David poked her, and she stomped him into oblivion. Hard to argue with those facts.
It'd be like LeBron James's wife slapping his hand and him punching her in the face as hard as he could. Regardless of whether David was in the right to slap at Penelope's hand, her response was not grown-up behavior in any place I'd want to live.
loud.*Anyone else got a quirky analogy or three?
*
I'm somehow back here again. Why? Probably because I need to write this comment.
I don't completely disagree with what you're saying, and it's very well-laid out. I think you have to remember that Penelope is very popular and thus every move she makes is very criticized. It's not her "fault" because she puts herself out there for everyone to read. We all do that as bloggers, it's just most of us don't have a lot of people who care.
Did she flip out on David? Maybe. But it wasn't because he attacked her and she couldn't take it. People attack Penelope all the time online. What I think is missing in this post (and others like it) is context: that Penelope probably saw David's comment as an attack on her children. That's how I would see it.
Maybe her actions were extreme. But look. If someone attacked my children or my love for my children (and I don't even have children, so technically we're talking about my future children) I would probably go nuts. Because normal people who love their children go crazy over those things. And sometimes those people are semi-famous like Penelope is.
Maybe you're right, but my sympathy is with P at the end of the day. I don't think what she did was that despicable and it certainly wasn't unprovoked when you put David's tweet in the context of attacking P's children.
PS. No offense to Rikin or any other guys, I'm just wondering if there are any mothers who have written a post like this. I've only seen versions of this post on single guy's blogs. Just a passing thought.
Thanks for coming back and leaving a comment that I know you thought about.
I agree, it'd be nice to hear what a lot of mothers had to say about PT's
post but I believe some have commented here and I know I've read quite a few
comments by mothers on either side of the argument.
I also don't think my post lacks the thought that David was 'attacking' her
children because in my eyes that's a little bit of a stretch. I might be
wrong but I just don't see how he 'attacked' them, I can't find any threat
in there.
Oh wells. I guess it's all over with now but we definitely can learn
SOMETHING from this even if everyone doesn't take away the same thing.
Thanks for coming by again!
Rikin
PT was bored - it can happen - but David told her she didn't want her kids - one had nothing to do with the other. If you do the samething for too long, you can get bored.
I had a total stranger tell me that I couldn't walk my dogs on my own lawn - where does it stop? Why don't people have respect for others anymore? Why is everything me, me, me these days?
Someone makes a snarky remark on Twitter, and this woman goes berserk and calls him at work? David's remark wasn't even that bad - I've said much worse things to my friends as a passing joke.
It's like a bad episode of Jerry Springer, or a Howard Stern prank gone wrong. But then again, I suppose that make for good reading.
Moral of this story: Jerry Springer is way cooler than CBS News!