Disqus - Latest Comments for dansolomon

Re: Presenting the Ultimate Texas Brand Bracket Final Four

dan solomon — Fri, 24 Mar 2023 15:15:43 -0000

Readers are invited to vote on all of the platforms, if they want to. To game the results on the social sites, they’d need multiple accounts, which frankly seems like a ton of work, so I’m not too worried about that.

As for our site, we are monitoring for egregious vote manipulation—late on Tuesday, for example, we got a huge number of votes all just for one brand, all from the same IP address. We hadn’t, till that point, made a plan for how to deal with that, but it didn’t end up mattering—they were able to tip things on the site, but Instagram (the biggest voting source for this) and Twitter were enough for the proper winner to take it. If it comes up again (in this bracket or a future one), we’ll strike excessive bot votes.

That’s not the case with DQ, though! They played it straight and made a push on social (their own and with the help of an influencer account) directing their fans to the website to vote for them, which is just smart campaigning and 100% in-bounds. If they’d been able to rally the troops across all platforms, they’d have earned a win. (Rudy’s did something similar a few days earlier, and almost got a win out if it.) I’m glad these companies are rallying their fans the honest way, and if anybody is being especially shady, we should be able to catch ‘em.

Re: Presenting the Ultimate Texas Brand Bracket Final Four

dan solomon — Fri, 24 Mar 2023 12:43:11 -0000

DQ pulled more votes on the website, but we also do voting on Twitter, Facebook stories, and Instagram. Voting on those platforms went overwhelmingly in favor of Whataburger. Here's the Twitter poll, and the proportions were similar on the (now-expired) Instagram story. The final tally was Whataburger 7,484 to DQ 5,222, with 4,310 of DQ's votes coming through the poll you linked above.

Re: Dumpster Professor Is Moving Out Of His Trash Receptacle And Would Like To Sleep On Your Couch Now, Please

dan solomon — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 13:52:54 -0000

Little of both, I'd reckon.

Re: Dumpster Professor Is Moving Out Of His Trash Receptacle And Would Like To Sleep On Your Couch Now, Please

dan solomon — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 13:21:12 -0000

"Hipster" describes an aesthetic, and it's one that both Wilson's home goods sponsors and the man himself clearly embrace. It's not a value judgment.

If you don't think it's at least a little bit funny that his embrace of minimalism still required him to have a bowtie for every day of the week, plus a spare or two just in case, then we may just have a different sense of humor.

Re: Okay, So, Renee Zellweger

dan solomon — Wed, 22 Oct 2014 17:51:12 -0000

They both are! Zellweger doesn't do much, but she's in it. http://img2-3.timeinc.net/e...

Re: xoJane

dan solomon — Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:47:42 -0000

Have you read this one? http://www.laweekly.com/wes...

It's much more thoughtful. I'm glad he wrote it.

Re: xoJane

dan solomon — Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:40:21 -0000

Actually, just read the second column published today -- it is much better, yeah. "I didn't understand what it's like for people with severe depression, I'm sorry, I am trying to understand it better" is a very good apology.

I'm glad. I have no desire to dump Henry Rollins from my list. (That signed GET IN THE VAN poster is still on its way!) But getting this right is important.

Re: xoJane

dan solomon — Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:30:54 -0000

Honestly, I've been trying to parse why Rollins' apology didn't work for me, and it's because it suggests that he holds two completely contradictory positions in his head: "Suicide is weak and fuck people who do it" is one position, and "I've lived with depression all my life and I totally understand what it's like" is the other. People got upset with him for the first, and he immediately jumped to the other without explaining how or why his thinking changed -- which made it seem like at least one of the things he said was insincere.

I haven't read the new column he published at LA Weekly yet -- it might be a lot better, but I think that first apology deserves to be dismissed.

Re: — Coined | Backer's Club

dan solomon — Fri, 22 Aug 2014 18:19:22 -0000

You are charging your earliest backers $30 for the privilege of beta-testing a product that you're now saying is going to ship a minimum of eight months late. As recently as a couple of weeks ago, you were still telling people that everything was on schedule. There's no reason to trust your company anymore.

Re: Let’s Talk About That Saginaw Wal-Mart Black Friday Video

dan solomon — Mon, 02 Dec 2013 16:06:27 -0000

Those 32" TVs at Wal-Mart were $99. That's a 40-50% discount against the very best prices you'll see for them the rest of the year, if not more.

Re: Diane

dan solomon — Fri, 29 Nov 2013 13:58:48 -0000

It's not reaching. None of us have any idea what her inner life was like in that moment, and if you refuse to allow for the possibility that her circumstances are more complicated than just "she doesn't want to wait for her flight," you're doing so because it's satisfying to see her as a jerk. To assume that it's "more likely than not" that people are just jerks demonstrates a rather dim view of humanity.

In any case: I'd caution you to remember that circumstances like sick family members and personal illnesses, especially as one reaches their late forties/early fifties and beyond, are not "special snowflake one in a million cases." They're actually pretty common.

Re: A Victory By the People

dan solomon — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:08:04 -0000

Thanks. I didn't hear about Christopher's feed until well after-the-fact. (News spread differently on the Capitol grounds itself than it did online, for obvious reasons, and it was a rather frenzied time.) I absolutely did not intend to leave him out, though -- I've been hearing from many people how important he was to keeping people informed, and I am a huge fan of that sort of broadcasting and reporting, and I'm extremely grateful that he was on the ground. I was just probably standing on the other side of the rotunda from him, so I didn't see it.

Re: THE TROUBLE WITH SELF-BRANDING

dan solomon — Thu, 20 Jun 2013 15:44:30 -0000

I've given a lot of thought to this, too, and what I've come up with is that you can have a pretty wide "personal brand," and it can encompass all of the things you care about the most, if it's about perspective rather than content.

Like, I've worked really, really hard not to be "music blogger guy," because that's so fucking boring I could fart blood. But I like writing about music a lot. I've had to make sure I'm not seen as a comics blogger, even though I like writing about comics, because no one can make any money doing that. I write about sports, but being a Sports Guy Blogger isn't a brand, it's tossing yourself into an ocean of similarly-colored fish.

I've tried (no idea how well I've succeeded) to establish my "brand," such as it is, as "guy who is thoughtful about a lot of areas of culture." That way, the only things that are really off-brand for me are things that are stupid, and hopefully I won't want to post that stuff too much. But if I decide that, after blogging exclusively about football and comic books for a month, I want to start writing about menswear or bikes or food, I hope that the audience that likes me for the perspective I bring to that stuff will stick around for it, because the "brand" (I just can't type that word in reference to myself without scare quotes) is the same -- it's the subject matter that's changed.

But I've also built my whole career around not being a specialist, for reasons that have little to do with wanting to be successful and a lot to do with the fact that I get really bored really easily, and I'm a cranky teenager inside who immediately starts flipping the teacher off if she thinks that she knows who I really am. (Weirdly, I also had a really long conversation with Andrew WK about this earlier this week [new brand: dude who namedrops celebrities in blog comments!] that made me feel a lot better about it, and helped me solidify why I think this is much more satisfying for me than the alternative.

Other people's mileage will obviously vary on some of this, but I think the key in most cases is to build a brand around your perspective on the world, which is unlikely to change, rather than your interests, which can start to feel like traps. (There's also the fact that there are a zillion bloggers in the world who like the same stuff you do, so there may not be much margin in branding yourself by those things, while your perspective is much more likely to be unique.)

Thanks for bringing this up -- it's been on my mind a lot lately. Also, Andrew WK and I are best friends.

Re: The Soapbox: What Do Rape Jokes Make Rapists Think?

dan solomon — Mon, 03 Jun 2013 14:58:44 -0000

I can only assume this comment is a weirdly long way of saying "I didn't read this post."

You're responding to a brief summary of West's argument, essentially, and I'm aware that there are a lot of comedians and comedy fans who are happy to accept triggering a rape survivor as collateral damage. Which is why this post that you are responding to is about the RAPIST who hears the joke. That person isn't offended by your rape joke! That person LOVES your rape joke! Your rape joke makes that person feel very comfy! That person doesn't want to get up and leave! That person is SO PSYCHED that you're up there sending the message that what he did was normal and okay, which is what the shitty variety of rape jokes do.

I'm not upset because I'm offended by whatever joke -- it takes a lot to offend me. I'm upset because THE COMEDIAN TOLD A RAPIST THAT RAPE WASN'T A BIG DEAL.

I said all of this in the post. Pay attention, son.

Re: Guy Talk: On Being A Dude In A Sexist Society

dan solomon — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 15:44:53 -0000

It's context, too. If The Atlantic had published "the 40 hottest women in tech," then that might be a reasonable interpretation. But Complex is specifically designed to cater to the libidos of horny straight dudes. Like, the very first link if you click the "girls" tab on the website right now is "30 movies that'll get you laid." It's obvious what they're going for.

Re: Guy Talk: On Being A Dude In A Sexist Society

dan solomon — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 14:45:24 -0000

Sure, yeah, if you're in a position to materially affect change, definitely do that. But don't join a whites-only country club in the hope that you'll be able to convince your fellow members that they should open it up, you know?

Re: natepatrin: katherinestasaph: bmichael: PSA:... | IGIVETHATSHITTHEFINGER

dan solomon — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 03:11:40 -0000

I think you're probably right, but I don't think I ever identified it in that way before. I don't consciously think about the fact that Spotify might yank Songs Of Love And Hate or whatever from its servers, but I do recognize a stream as inherently impermanent, and it makes me suspicious.

Re: dansolomon.com | Can you believe the final page of The Dark Knight...

dan solomon — Mon, 11 Feb 2013 01:56:07 -0000

Oh, he's not the one selling it. It'll go to whoever it is that bought it years ago.

I doubt he can get much for his HOLY TERROR original pages, either.

Re: Guy Talk: Why A Straight Man Like Me Cares About Transgender Rights

dan solomon — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:24:19 -0000

Oh my gosh, thank you for calling me on that. Obviously I do need to keep learning -- I'm really sorry about that.

Re: Guy Talk: Why A Straight Man Like Me Cares About Transgender Rights

dan solomon — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:46:40 -0000

That is correct -- it appears it did run in print in The Observer. It ran online at Guardian.com, though, so I'm sure you can understand the confusion from the US.

Re: Guy Talk: Why A Straight Man Like Me Cares About Transgender Rights

dan solomon — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:00:19 -0000

Well, I've promised my wife not to fall in love with anyone else, but yes! That is a possibility, generally speaking, as well.

Re: Sitcoms

dan solomon — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:10:56 -0000

Oh, yeah, that's for sure more effective than CSI. I even think that it's easier to identify with the characters on PARTY DOWN than it is on, say, NASHVILLE or BREAKING BAD or SOPRANOS, which are very good shows that aim for some degree of relatability (in emotion, if not in circumstance). At least it is for me.

The dramatic shows that are able to connect in that way, like FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS (or BUFFY, but I'm not sure that BUFFY isn't just a sitcom with long episodes), are critically acclaimed specifically because of how intensely we connect with them. I'm guessing that it's because we usually either go plot-heavy and high-concept (a la SOPRANOS or BREAKING BAD) or soapy (like NASHVILLE) with our dramatic shows, and those things don't lend themselves to subtlety. Which is your point, I suppose, but it's interesting to me because it indicates some commonality between shows like SOPRANOS and CSI, which most critics probably wouldn't acknowledge. Thanks for the comment.

(Also, it gets me thinking about LOST, too, which I love because I think its character moments were extremely effective in ways that I think annoyed everybody else, who seemed much more interested in the high-concept stuff. But this comment will go on forever if I start talking about that.)

Re: Guy Talk: What Dudes Need To Know About The “Friendzone”

dan solomon — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:21:47 -0000

Okay, here's what I genuinely don't understand about your first point: If you're friends with a woman who goes out with jerks, and you're not secretly hoping to date her, then it doesn't seem to me like you're in the "friendzone"; it seems like you're just FRIENDS. Which is still unfortunate -- it's hard to watch your friends be in shitty relationships -- but I'm not sure what she's doing to YOU in that situation.

Meanwhile, if he has told her that he wants to date her, she's either said yes or no, right? If she said no, and he's still hanging around hoping for a date, I'm not sure how he's being used or manipulated.

As for the "standards of confidence," it's not that hard: a guy is confident enough for a woman to date when he can, you know, ask her out, or otherwise directly express his interest. That's the only standard required.

Re: Just to be clear, regarding this shit on Culturemap Dallas…

dan solomon — Tue, 27 Nov 2012 13:08:44 -0000

Thanks, Amy -- I just caught your post on your own blog, and while I don't begrudge anyone who's continued to work with CultureMap (freelancers gotta eat), it actually was really encouraging to see how you responded. I'll miss seeing your author interviews on the site -- good books writing is rare! -- but I'm sure you'll find another outlet soon.

One Mike Graupmann is worth a thousand Claire St. Amants. I'm happy for him that he's moved on to better things.

Re: Is this Highland Park baseball star a rapist?

dan solomon — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:43:30 -0000

Just to clear a few things up:

I only posted to my blog after Claire wrote a second post doubling-down on what she said in this one, in response to a number of others who voiced the same criticism that I mentioned in my blog. By then, I didn't see the point in contacting her, because she'd obviously already heard the same things I was going to say, and dismissed them. Meanwhile -- as someone who had represented CultureMap in the past on the radio, at inter-media charity events, etc -- I felt that my credibility as someone who comments on things like this post was severely at risk the longer I stayed silent on it when it came from someone whose checks I cashed.

After meeting with the editors of the Austin edition, we agreed that I would stop writing for the site until this blew over.After thinking that through after the meeting, I felt that this wasn't the proper way to deal with the situation -- I was as upset by Claire's post as she seemed to be about mine, and waiting until she wasn't mad anymore so I could go back to writing for the site seemed like a really unsatisfying way to resolve this. I asked the editor of the Austin edition to put me in touch with Claire so I could attempt to resolve it by discussing it with her directly; she recommend that I reach out to Claire directly, so I sent her an email on November 15th. Eleven days after attempting to resolve the situation by talking with Claire directly and receiving no response, I published the post on xoJane.

There was no attempt on the behalf of CultureMap to "work out any perceived issues." The Austin editors suggested -- rightly -- that I talk them out with the person responsible for the post. That person ignored my attempt to contact her for a week and a half, and only responded at all -- right here -- after the post at xoJane went live.

Just to clarify exactly what happened on my end.