View Single Post
Old 10-15-2012, 09:09 AM   #53
graham christian
Dojo: golden center aikido-highgate
Location: london
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,697
Re: Who's missing out? (On "Promotion and advertising" rhetoric)

Travers Hughes wrote: View Post
Hi Graham, thanks for your reply. Apologies for the multi-quotes - I didn't want to bore readers with walls of text. Sometime these look confrontational - not my intention at all as I hope you'll see:

No, I don't take offence, and mentioned that it was my choice in my post. That's kinda my point. It's all about choices - choices to be aware of the message, show an interest, or even to act. I didn't have to write a message - I chose to. As it was your choice to reply.

That's not quite correct. You've made the assumption that I was happy with what I had. Did I say that? I just said that I didn't need one. This assumption is a promotion of your idea - a projection that doesn't exist for me. (FYI - quite simply, I don't watch many movies and don't see the need for one. When technology reaches the point that I'm forced to purchase for the convenience factor, then I'll do so).

I respectfully disagree. As a consumer, everything I choose to purchase is by my decision and ultimately my responsibility. If I make a bad decision, the responsibility is mine. It not rabble rousing at all to make such a statement. I agree the statement can be dishonest if you say it but don't mean it, though. That falls into the realm of being dishonet with oneself. That's the biggest sin in my book. (Note to all readers: I'm not accusing anyone, including Graham, of that. If you choose to see that trait in yourself, that's another story).

Of course not, you too.

We sure do. Hi pot, I'm kettle. Did you know you're black?

Can I suggest the terms in the title may be misleading to some? The terms "Promotion and Advertising" are not quite the same as "Salesmanship" (all of which I have been involved in for the last 20 odd years). Personally, I'm in favour of promotion done well.

Take care,
Hi Travers. Thanks for the reply. I think what you write here is almost the same as what I said so any 'discrepancy' is more down to wording than anything else.

Like 'happy with' and 'don't need'. When I say happy with it implied 'aware that what you have or use is sufficient for the time being' and therefor don't need. As you say that may change.

As a consumer also the fact of responsible for own choice is quite true. Rabble rousing refers to using tactics to make, or try to make, someone feel like they need or else. ie: if you don't do 'a' or have 'b' then you are not one of us or of correct worth or normal or.........I think you get the gist.
As I said the prime responsibility is knowing self, what you actually want or need just as you say in your way which means simply being honest with yourself.

Promotion, good promotion, again is a thing I say as you do is great.

Even if we look into the animal kingdom and lets say 'mating rituals' you can see these principles in action. The male usually putting on a show, great promotion and advertising which leads us to the next principle of why? To attract. The purpose is to attract.

Now imagine an animal being a scurrilous salesman. It would spend it's time telling all those other females why the other males are not good enough, don't do it right, haven't got what it takes. Sound familiar. All in order to attract them to him.

What a convoluted, complex, negative, destructive way of trying to achieve the same result of attracting.

Same aims, different methods. One natural one not and that's putting it politely.

To finish off I agree with you also that the OP could have been written better or put in a better way but so could virtually all things written. There will always be those who feel upset or confused or even angry with what another is doing or what they have said or written, always. You may be super successful and harming nobody yet someone will be upset by it and complain, usually loudly like an empty barrel. Jealousy is a prime example of such behavior as an example.

So yes you are right but as long as intention is not to harm or mislead or damage then I will say my piece.

Ueshiba once again was a fine example of this too. He spoke from where he saw and left it for others to come to understanding. If he had worried about who may be offended or even that many would not understand what he was saying (all a fact) then he would have remained silent.

Nice talking to you Travers, like your style.