2017-11-07 at

'I have no time for bitches'?

Various notes from #doggate which I embargoed from 7 Nov 2017, to 16 Dec 2019. Mostly with respect to the sensitivities of my business partners who were caught up in the events of the moment. My on views on this have not changed much in this time, but I believe that their passions may be less inflamed.
I just disembargoed a bunch of notes in blogposts about my work. If you're aware about my work over the past five years, you'll know where to look and what to look for. The embargoes were placed to protect the socio-political sensitivities of stakeholders in my project. I think, it has now been long enough a time for them to have a fair chance at getting over it. As usual, I have the worst of consequences in mind as a possibility, and I am standing by to accept the worst-case scenario.
/

A Facebook post:
There exists a dog I have been kicking for two years. It still comes near to us, and probably is lonely, seeking a place to dwell until it dies. I threw it off the porch. It landed on its back. It walked away. If it comes back, I may call the pound, as that is less offensive than executing it myself. And for all of this, I am sure many people will dislike me. But I do it anyway. Why? Because I too am ready to die, and I take my chances with the world, and I am waiting for someone to execute me. Every day, we shall see, what the future brings. If it brings another day, we will have to figure out how to spend it. I will not spend it on a dog.
/
A Facebook post:
What I mean, is that in my personal capacity as an executive, I have directed policy for my operations, as such. Therefore any onerous behaviour attributable to the organisation which stems from my directions, ultimately should be pinned on me. It is then appropriate for one to hate an organisation, its brand, and anyone who chooses to associate themselves with it. However, please reserve the most extreme ire for myself, and do not direct it so much at the poor, suffering, perhaps more easily damaged, souls whom out of their compassion or other motivations have decided to accompany me.
/
A Facebook post:
Tired. But, unfortunately, still alive and on contract. Arise, to force feed, to hurl puppies, to smack cats, to indoctrinate humans, and all in all, to improve our quality of work. Violence calls for an ascension. What limbs shall we lose today? First, laundry...
/
A Facebook post:
When I thought LDG did something cool that we might have to do someday, I didn't think it would also involve dogs. Haha.
/
First response to initial complaint (initial complaint redacted, but I believe it is in the records):
Hello, I threw the dog. Also, I will post here as myself, and not on behalf of the company, as we have many staff and shareholders who are more affectionate with strays than I am - to be clear, my actions and my views are a reflection of only my personal point of view. We have experienced discipline issues with this dog for nearly two years. I will personally see to the removal of the dog by any means necessary, including calling the city pound, if it continues to invade out premises.

Since we received complaints from customers about the persistent smell of the dog, we have a policy of not allowing Stinky (the dog) on the red brick area. The dog does not respond to English. It does responds well to negative feedback, as I have personally carried, pushed, kicked, and otherwise shoved it off the red brick on dozens of occasions, following which it tends to stop visiting for a while. However, as with many humans, machines, animals, plants... our memories are imperfect, and the dog's memory clearly also does not allow it to remember the pain that it has experienced on our premises.

If you would like to provide assistance, you may leave your contact details with us, and we will inform you if Stinky turns up and invades the premises again. Should there be no action within 20 minutes of a call, I will personally see to the permanent, and irreversible, removal of the dog.

Thank you.

Jerng
The Managing Partner
/
A Facebook post:
Digging the knife a little deeper. Seeing where we go. Does it kill us? Do we profit from it? Such is the abandonment of neutral positions, and the stirring of controversy. Branding, ah, chess. (As if!) It is one way to pass time.
/
A Facebook post:
One star reviews popping in. Pew pew pew... #doggate
/
Follow-up comment, in the initial complaint thread, after someone mentioned LDG:
You are correct. We don't do very well as a business. It is completely my fault, if anyone is faulty. But I accept it as a limitation.

Also, I've personally been a huge fan of the LDG case study since the day it went viral. I have always thought the LDG folks made a general misstep by apologising against their original intentions, but that is also just a personal opinion. :)

I did not mean to create this controversy, but I am now fascinated by how it will play out, and have been encouraging the subject to gain traction. I do understand that it could result in the end of my business, but it is one threat in a sea of many threats which we have to deal with daily.

At the end of the day, words will gain us nothing. Only actions. We all vote with our actions.

Since I have provided a personal view here, I will now no longer reply to this thread in person. Please do the necessary communications in whichever forum you seek, here, on my personal page, or elsewhere.

Thank you again for engaging.
/
A Facebook post:
Crash course in coffee roasting and sugar development terminology. Investor relations emails. Soon, dinner.
/
A Facebook post:
I was feeling threatened. So I reflected on the text. And I recalled the popular model: threats come from without, weaknesses come from within. Then I realised, I was feeling weakness. Then I proceeded to dinner while thinking it would be very cheesy to write down. But the heuristic of transparency wins again.
/
A Facebook post:
The risk profile of offensive PR campaigns is like the sale of a put option. You really want to sell a butterfly. But symmetrical calls and puts may not be marketable, so you model an asymmetrical approximation of symmetry... sell them, and hope for the best.
/
A Facebook post:
Someone said they would spit on me if they saw me, but I can't reply directly so here is a general announcement. I am happy to schedule spitting sessions as therapeutic services for anyone who would feel better about it. This is a personal offer on my personal page. Please sign up in groups for scheduling efficiencies.
/
A Facebook post:
So minimal research being done, I found the laws that apply to my job, and this is what I need to know about going to jail. My actions would have to be judged to be cruel, whereas my consolation would be that I was implementing food safety, since that is the guideline we have been following by banning animals indoors. To my knowledge, I don't think I was cruel to the dog - the alternative to disciplining the dog as we have, would be to send it to the shelter where it would likely be put to death anyway - and we actively avoided that for two years. But that opens up the entire discussion on the probabilistic outcome of dogs that go to shelters. :)
/
One of the people who offered to take the dog if it turns up again:
I assume my message did not evoke any positive emotions in you if any, so best not. But if you'd like to use this platform for your expression regarding it, that's fine too.
But either way, thanks for handling this with much more grace than I expected
My response to the above:
Well... people ask if I get personal attacks, and if I am ok. I just tell them that I am not the one suffering here... the angry people are suffering. The dog is barely suffering (we have a long relationship). And now the dog is famous and will not have to be put down, in all likelihood. 🙂

We will send it to PAWS or whatever... and usually they will put down the strays, but because he is famous, you know... go guess.
/

Preparatory notes in case of need for legal defense.
Like this.

1. We have dog trouble.

2. Textbook answer is kill shelter.

3. Arbitrary decision to avert kill shelter on compassionate grounds.

4. Infliction of negative feedback on dog in order to achieve 3. (I would claim, non-excessive, moderated, including tossing.) This is the key claim to be finally judged a court - dogs can't talk, so it will be up to a judge or jury to determine if "cruelty" was present. If and only if "cruelty" was present, would any charge of "abuse," be relevant.

5. The end. Except: now we have chance to talk about 1-4. All opportunities should be capitalised upon. Deploy response to review.

6. Partners intervene. This is where it gets interesting. They cannot believe I am doing this on purpose.

7. Partners act but fudge first public apology. Corrected.

8. Wait and see what happens next. Dog is famous. Partners are unified. Cafe ratings can go to nil for all I care, but I want to see traffic... and I will judge success of 5. by what happens financially to sales. Everyone is anticipating destruction. I admit it is probable.
/
Other notes:
The instagram post 2016 jan is artificially sweet because it was written to move the dog. I do not personally care about the dog as a person.
Fast forward: i did as I wrote for two years, but that does not constitute abuse. By law, cruelty must be present. I believe my movements of the dog were moderate by common measures.
Fast forward again to last Sunday 🙂
By the way, I made a point to preserve CCTV footage in case of law enforcement. So all the partners have seen it now.
The law requires it to be cruel. You can kick at 1 newton of force and no one is ever going to prosecute you for cruelty. Let's get back to the story 😛

I will submit to the court, jury or judge, to decide if there is evidence of cruelty.
If they so judge, then I go to jail. Simple. Boring.
Back to story.
So the reviewer (and I am making a point to use a gender neutral term) decided to complain about the treatment of the dog. The reviewer fit a genre of human we are all familiar with: the jihadi.
My reply to the reviewer was:
- intentionally inflammatory,
- devoid of admission of cruelty,
- a challenge to the reviewer to participate by submitting contact details to pick up the pooch

Two happy surprises resulted.

1. My partners got interested. Usually they are absent. So now I cannot speak to media outlets about work, and i cannot speak online about it. And they may further censure me. That is actually overall happy for me for the following reasons. (1) I now have less work to do on a daily basis, until they return social media responsibilties to me. (2) The
degree of participation in the last week has surpassed anything I have seen in the last two years, which means if they keep up at it... there will be a stronger organisation, regardless of whether I remain (i have no preference to leave, but they may want me to). Their motivation is fear and embarassment.

2. The reviewer really knocked it out of the ballpark. The reviewer managed to deliver a demonstration of the great disparity between (number of cybertroopers for X) and (number of people willing to put money where their mouth is for X).
By the time 2. was in full swing, I was delighted to continue but 1. then occured, so temporarily we are here.
Well, that is the short version.

I think all parties are happy that the dog is famous and now less likely to have to be put down.
Proceed to comment if you want to disbelieve, or believe me. Haha

Meanwhile, further observations on my part:
- I think it's funny that I could be guilty of Sedition (1948), as I actually bullied SJWs by letting them irrationally believe that I bullied a dog
- now that people are saying I am pursuing a buy out for my shares, I can't even vote for it no matter how good the terms are 😱as that would be an indication of preference to escape fiduciary duties. Sigh. So cute.
- i don't care how low ratings go as long as business is ok
- overall: i can't say it is a social experiment (and it is not, as that would be a bad executive action) but a business strategy, or approach, which is to say i have to believe we can make a profit from all of this as a business, not just me as an individual.
- (thinking over the dim sum)

Oh yes,
- a large part of the success of the strategy depends on proper investigative journalism and media coverage of the SJW behaviour to show how irrational and dangerous it can be, to a degree where regulators should be watching how the mob moves.
That's all i think.
/
To staff:
📰⌨ 🐕 Quick status update (from me, to you) on the recent terrorist attack about our social media page.

- Currently, I am not allowed to discuss this job with any media outlet (I trust none of you are media outlets, and if you know a customer is a media outlet, please let me know so that I don't discuss work with them).

- I am also currently not allowed to post on S's social media properties, so I forward urgent announcements to a partner, C, and then it is up to her to do as she wishes.

- R (staff) is under none of the embargoes above. To my knowledge. You may pass social media messaging requests to her.

- As such I am unable to publicly address any accusations of abuse, mismanagement, sabotage, or treatment of animals. If you have individuals who are concerned, please send them directly to me (if they are not media outlets), and I will provide them with an opinion.

- If you feel that I have harassed you as a staff, please file a report with the appropriate authorities, or speak to me about it, whichever you prefer. You must always speak for your concerns.

- Thank you for sticking with the operation even though I can't say anything about it online. 🙈🙊

Hope you're having a great Sunday. :)
/

No comments :

Post a Comment