Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Penelope Trunk
Is this you? Claim Profile »
3 months ago
in Brazen Faith - David Dellifield of Ada, Ohio is a Good Guy on rikin on the web
I understand that you guys think my post was out of line. I want to suggest, though, that blogging for most people and blogging on a high-profile blog actually do not have the same rules.
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.
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.
2 replies
rikin
Penelope,
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
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
4 months ago
in Impatience: The Silent Killer of Most Start-Ups on Twenty Set
Monica, this is a great post. And I think you'll be happy to know that two people sent me the link and told me to read it :) The point you make about how sending a mass email is easier than making a meaningful connection with a few people -- that's so true. It's about asking ourselves really, what is productivity and what is BS?
Penelope
Penelope
1 reply
monicaobrien
Penelope,
Thanks! I'm glad you like it. I have a client who loves mass email. It's hilarious because they coach high schoolers on how to write personalized emails to adults, and when I pointed out to the CEO that he's breaking all his own rules by sending mass emails he was amazed. They are starting to tone it down now, so that makes me happy that maybe I can make a difference in the way they do business.
Thanks! I'm glad you like it. I have a client who loves mass email. It's hilarious because they coach high schoolers on how to write personalized emails to adults, and when I pointed out to the CEO that he's breaking all his own rules by sending mass emails he was amazed. They are starting to tone it down now, so that makes me happy that maybe I can make a difference in the way they do business.
4 months ago
in Defining Entrepreneur on geeky
This is a good, sobering post. I think, you might take it one step further and say that entrepreneurship is the wrong thing to do. It's largely self-destructive choice when you make the choice whole-hog -- that is, no other job on the side. Entrepreneurs have an extraordinarily high rate of divorce and bankruptcy.
We mostly hear about entrepreneurs who start very young and make it big early. However most entrepreneurs never make it big, and as they get older and older the risks of entrepreneurship are more and more difficult.
Penelope
We mostly hear about entrepreneurs who start very young and make it big early. However most entrepreneurs never make it big, and as they get older and older the risks of entrepreneurship are more and more difficult.
Penelope
1 reply
girk
Thanks for the great comment. I originally made that point, then took it out because I felt it was to divisive. However, I added it back in after you made this comment. Here it is:
"One way to prepare yourself is to keep your job and do it on the side. Dedicate all of your spare time to it, sacrifice sleep and fun for it. What is that you say? You don’t have time? Well, if you don’t have time to do it now, you probably don’t have time to do it full-time, because all of that sacrifice is quite an accurate preview of what it’ll be really like."
"One way to prepare yourself is to keep your job and do it on the side. Dedicate all of your spare time to it, sacrifice sleep and fun for it. What is that you say? You don’t have time? Well, if you don’t have time to do it now, you probably don’t have time to do it full-time, because all of that sacrifice is quite an accurate preview of what it’ll be really like."
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.