FAQ Memberlist Usergroups Register Log in
Profile Log in to check your private messages Search

Vote for Change - V for Change
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> General Discussion

Do you agree with my "Training Video"?
Yes!
16%
 16%  [ 2 ]
No!
75%
 75%  [ 9 ]
Bits and Peices
8%
 8%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 12

Author Message
PurpleCactusPlant



Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Posts: 218
Location: 2010 Olympics (Please enjoy them, b/c I am paying for them).

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 2:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is this true? I've heard that "I-might-end-up-becoming-President Palin" has never been outside of the United States. What's really worrisome is she doesn't think there's anything wrong with that. As a citizen of a country that is not the US, and someone who has had to deal with ridiculous questions coming from tourists who are middle-aged and out of their respective countries for the first time, I'm scared about foreign policy... for everyone.
_________________
My printer thinks it's some kinda guitar hero because it won't stop jamming.
Finhawk=Love
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tinalles
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 1630
Location: Grand Forks

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PCP -- yes, she hasn't traveled until recently. The NY Times reported this:

McCain Chooses Palin, the NY Times wrote:
Ms. Palin appears to have traveled very little outside the United States. In July 2007, she had to get a passport before she visited members of the Alaska National Guard stationed in Kuwait, according to her deputy communications director, Sharon Leighow. She also visited wounded troops in Germany during that trip.


Source for preceding.


----------------------------------------------------


And, since Squee brought it up, I think he's probably right about devilman's rhetorical situation. Devilman, please note that this not an attack on you, or even on your ideas -- it's just an analysis of the environment you're working in and how you approached it.

In most theories of rhetoric, the rhetorical situation consists of three basic parts: the audience, the author (or "rhetor" if you're talking fancy), and the text. Let's look at each of those.

First, the rhetor -- devilman2045. He's fairly new to the forum. As of this writing, his profile shows 17 posts overall, most in this thread but a few in the characters section, so he hasn't been around long enough to have a pre-existing reputation. His primary goal is: to get more people to vote for McCain.

Next, the audience. The composition of the forum is:

  • Fairly young, ranging from about 12 to about 30, I'd guess, with the majority in their mid-to-late teens.
  • All over the map politically, ranging from highly conservative to notably liberal. I suspect that more of the forumites lean towards the liberal side of the spectrum than the conservative, because young people tend to be less conservative than older people. That's obviously not a hard-and-fast rule; just a general tendency.
  • Mostly assorted flavors of Christian, with sizable minorities of Jews and agnostics/atheists -- I don't think we've got any Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists, but I could be wrong.
  • Scattered across the planet. I don't think we've got any reliable data on this -- the Earthsong Frappr map lost a lot of data at some point -- but I'm guessing that we have a majority in North America but only a small majority, and a good bit of that is Canadian. The rest are mostly concentrated in north-west Europe and in Israel, with individuals and small groups scattered all over everywhere else in the entire world.

The composition of the forum has big implications for devilman's goals. Since his primary goal is to get people to vote for McCain, he needs to address primarily Americans (and a few people with dual-citizenship like Tamir). But at the same time, the forum is a longstanding community, and the non-American contingent can influence their American friends. So, secondary goal: don't piss off the non-Americans.

Let's look at the text now. It's composed of several parts: the thread title, the poll part, the first post, and the movie link.

The thread title is important because it's the first thing that anyone reading the forum will see. It's got to attract their attention and induce them to click the link. The thread title devilman chose is: "Vote for Change - V for Change". I'm not sure why the phrase is repeated, or why "Vote" gets shortened to "V" the second time, but I don't think it really matters. People visited the thread, and I bet they had a pretty good idea going in that it would be about the American election. So it did its job.

The text of the first post serves a different purpose. Having gotten people to click the link, he can now start working towards his main goal, which is getting people to vote for McCain.

The approach he took at this point is rather interesting, in a weird sort of way. The post is a monologue, addressed to America. ("Good evening, America" is the first line.) Although the speaker of the monologue is never formally identified, it's reasonably clear that the speaker is supposed to be God.

I can think of two reasons devilman might have done it this way. First, it might have been designed to intrigue the reader, so that he or she would keep reading out of curiosity. It could be trying to inspire the question "Where's he going with this?" so that people will keep reading to find out.

The other reason has to do with credibility. A long-time forum member has had time to build up credibility and authority based on hundreds or thousands of posts -- the other forumites know him or her, and will usually be willing to read based on that familiarity. Devilman can't do that, because he hasn't got a personal history at the forum to build on. So instead, he uses ventriloquism: it's not devilman speaking, it's God. Obviously God has oodles of authority. Pretty much the Last Word on anything and everything, by definition.

The curiosity gambit is a reasonably good approach, I think. The fact that it's a monologue doesn't really help. A monologue implies just one person talking, no debate or discussion. Having the monologue spoken by God may well have been a serious mis-step. I suspect some of our more devout members may well find it mildly blasphemous. And of course there's also a long-standing tradition in America that religion and politics ought to be separate. Not everyone feels that way, of course, and there's a sizable number of American who really want religion back in politics, but it's still a risky approach because those who do NOT want religion involved in politics tend to feel very strongly about the matter.

The text is also weird in that God seems to be playing the role of a manager reprimanding a slacker employee, i.e. America. Or possibly humanity -- although the monologue opens by addressing America, it shortly segues into addressing the whole of the human race ("ten thousand years" is a lot longer than America has been around). I do not think that devilman meant to imply that America is the single most important part of humanity, but it came off sounding that way, as the annoyed comments from our non-American members show.

But I digress. What I started out to say is that it's kind of weird to cast God as a business manager. It's just ... well, loopy. Businesses are about making money. Money is quintessentially worldly. God is, well, other-worldly. What would he be paying humanity to do, anyway?

Anyway, the final weird thing about the post is that it's not actually making a case to get you to vote for John McCain. The poll question attached to it is 'Do you agree with my "Training Video"?' The whole point of the first post was to get us to click the link to the video.

And that link is weird, too, because it doesn't lead to any one video. It leads to a collection of videos, which will change over time. And it doesn't say "Vote for McCain" or anything obvious like that, or at any rate it didn't when I watched it. The video at that point consisted of a whole bunch of snippets of politicians talking, interspersed with screenshots of articles on web pages, and with commentary by the video's producer overlaid on top. It was difficult to both listen to the audio and read the rapidly-changing text. And the scenes changed so rapidly that the flickering made my head hurt. It was also long. Ten minutes? Eleven? By the time a reader gets to the video they've already invested a long time reading the monologue, and may not be willing to invest that much more time in it. I certainly wasn't -- I gave up about about two and a half minutes into the video.

It wasn't until the second post that devilman actually said what was on his mind, which is that we should vote for McCain. Which was, by the way, a double-post, which is commonly frowned upon in Internet forums like this one, meaning that by the time devilman communicated his main point, he'd broken one of the community standards. To be fair, double posting is not explicitly discussed in the rules of the forum; it's part of general Internet etiquette. It's also a very common mistake, particularly among new members, so it's not a great sin or anything. It's just annoying.

It looks to me like devilman was writing for a different audience than he actually got. He was writing for people who:

  1. Are American
  2. Are monotheists, and most likely Christians
  3. Don't mind mixing religion and business
  4. Don't mind mixing religion and politics
  5. Like allegory
  6. Don't mind watching long hard-to-follow videos

Well, maybe not the last one. I don't think there are people like that, except maybe for film studies majors, and even they get headaches after a few too many flickering scene changes.

Anyone who meets the first four criteria is probably going to be voting for McCain anyway. So ... what's the point of trying to persuade them to do so? I could hazard some guesses, but I think this post is long enough as it is.

Tips for future advocacy:

  1. Get to the point.
  2. Find out what kind of people you're talking to.
  3. Write for people who don't already agree with you.
  4. Usually people will click a link if you ask them to; you don't need eleven paragraphs of introduction.


I'd like to wrap up by saying that devilman has done a good job of responding to the criticisms people have raised so far. He's responded civilly, and when he's made mistakes he's admitted them gracefully, apologized, and moved on. That strikes me as a good attitude.
_________________
Keeper of The Remnant Minuon (cognomen Lucy, the Eaten One) and the Emissary Caeli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
electricpanda



Joined: 03 Sep 2008
Posts: 608
Location: Smelbourne

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 8:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

While I'm not an American citizen, I have been following the campaigning somewhat - mainly because politics of all sorts interest me, not only from a personal point of view, but from an intellectual perspective. I've always held the view that Politics is to Philosophy as Physics is to Maths. Thus, Tin's post above was really interesting Very Happy

On a slightly more personal note, I do worry about this election a little. The thought of Palin in any kind of federal position quite frankly frightens me - as an inhabitant of a country whose main defense is the U.S, and the knowledge that there's an expectancy to reciprocate at least a little, I don't want to see any wars due to an insensitive foreign policy. I have a friend in the Army, and I don't want to see her getting taken off to some godforsaken warzone and blown up or something.

Obama strikes as someone who, even if inexperienced, seems more than intelligent enough to be able to figure out how to work the White House.

And McCain reminds me of Mr. Magoo. Does anybody else get that, or am I the only one?
_________________
Dubbed Pants by AsA, via the way of the electric pants.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
YatesOfYore
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 889

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some of the comments made here make me worry that many people (not just those on this forum, btw), actually listen to the smear campaigns that are put out by both sides.

These fortunately aren't as common in Canada, thank goodness, and frankly, they disgust me. It's like 5 year olds yelling nasty things at each other. This type of school-yard rhetoric is almost always stretched so far that it might as well be lies. It's meant to evoke an emotional, not an intellectual, reaction from you and voting from your "gut" is ... well, gutless, if you ask me. It's just a metaphor for "I didn't take the time to check out the actual facts".

I'm sure many of you have already seen this, but I feel like posting it for the sake of those who haven't, or those who want a good chuckle again. I'd never given Paris Hilton a second thought before this video, but I have to admit that it's brilliant. (And I would find it funny if it had been put out against whichever candidate - I'm not trying to pick on McCain here)

Enjoy! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0elllwRI8k
_________________
Keeper of Nanashi's Vambraces and the Amethyst Trees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sunshine



Joined: 05 Sep 2008
Posts: 592
Location: Up in the Clouds

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Lady, that video just made my week.
_________________
I do commissions!
Interested? Let me know! :D

My deviantART page

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Tenshi



Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Posts: 2594
Location: Star Stuff

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think my respect for Paris Hilton has now gone over 0. Razz

And in response to facts over smears? Well, smears are more fun. Razz Seriously though, finding the facts on candidates who tend to tailor their messages to whomever their speaking is a bit difficult. If you look at voting records for either candidate, they have records that are counter-intuitive to their message. This is, as mentioned before, part of the political process. You can't always force your views, and if you vote "no" on everything you disagree with you're going to get absolutely nothing done. You have to give up a few things, to get a lot of things.

I don't think voting from your gut, or instinct, is "gutless" really. Sometimes when you're overwhelmed with smear campaigns, all you can do is take a step back, breathe, and follow your first instinct. Try and see both parties neutrally, and select a better candidate from there. The difficult thing there being that most people will never see McCain or Obama neutrally.

My brother, for instance, says "I don't want to be part of an Obama Nation!" (Say Obama nation, it comes out slightly similarly to "abomination" with his hick accent..)

My mother and father are die-hard Republicans, who see conspiracies in everything the Democratic party does. They see Republican party candidates as heroes, and Democratic candidates as devils.

There are people like that for both sides though, I assure you... "Bulldog with lipstick" was my favorite Palin smear...
_________________
. Dubbed "Usagi" by AsA .
Keeper of the Siderean Swords

"If by chance some day you're not feeling well, and you should remember some silly thing I've said or done, and it brings back a smile to your face or a chuckle to your heart, then my purpose as your clown has been fulfilled."
Red Skelton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
theBSDude



Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 1800
Location: The boring part of Washington

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tinalles wrote:
[devilman] was writing for people who:

  1. Are American
  2. Are monotheists, and most likely Christians
  3. Don't mind mixing religion and business
  4. Don't mind mixing religion and politics
  5. Like allegory
  6. Don't mind watching long hard-to-follow videos


>_>
<_<

You need to stop stalking me, dude.
_________________
...In accordance with the prophesy.

TheBSDude, dubbed 'BS' by Asa and nicknamed 'Thebes.'
Keeper of the Tristam, The Amazing Non-Emo Vampire!(tm) and a Massive List of Webcomics.

"I'm like a ninja with no hopes or dreams." --Wally of Dilbert
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Tinalles
Site Admin


Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 1630
Location: Grand Forks

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tenshi wrote:
"Bulldog with lipstick" was my favorite Palin smear...


Err. That wasn't a Democratic smear. That was Palin herself. In her acceptance speech at the GOP convention in Minneapolis, she said:

Sarah Palin wrote:
I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town. I was just your average hockey mom and signed up for the PTA.

(APPLAUSE)

I love those hockey moms. You know, they say the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.


The lines show up in the transcript at the NY Times, but not the official GOP transcript. I don't think it's a cover-up or anything; the GOP site's says at the top that they've put up her "Remarks as Prepared for Delivery", and I suspect that the hockey-mom pit-bull joke was a spur of the moment addition.

theBSDude wrote:
>_>
<_<

You need to stop stalking me, dude.


Mwa ha ha. My network of informants is vast and cunningly hidden. You'll never escape my ceaseless surveillance, never!!!1!!111!!!1
_________________
Keeper of The Remnant Minuon (cognomen Lucy, the Eaten One) and the Emissary Caeli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tenshi



Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Posts: 2594
Location: Star Stuff

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It still counts as a smear in my book, whether it's said by Palin herself or an opponent. I just happen to like "bulldog with lipstick" the best. Razz

Re-reading my post, I can see that how I worded it may have been a bit confusing. I was just loathe to split the last sentences into two separate, one-sentence blocks...
_________________
. Dubbed "Usagi" by AsA .
Keeper of the Siderean Swords

"If by chance some day you're not feeling well, and you should remember some silly thing I've said or done, and it brings back a smile to your face or a chuckle to your heart, then my purpose as your clown has been fulfilled."
Red Skelton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
devilman2045
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tyris wrote:
Tinalles wrote:
If you go strictly by year count, Palin has more legislative experience than Obama does
Why are you comparing Palin to Obama in the first place? Are you expecting McCain to have a heart attack and put Palin in the President's chair within a week?


Though, by no means, is it being wished upon the man himself, it somehow seems that it is the fear of some people. Though I do believe that the MSM has quite a bit to do with raising that fear, and perpetuating it.

That aside though; I do believe it is something to strongly consider, because the fear, in itself, is somewhat legit. I mean, the old timer is 72 years young after all.
Back to top
YatesOfYore
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 889

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tenshi wrote:
I don't think voting from your gut, or instinct, is "gutless" really. Sometimes when you're overwhelmed with smear campaigns, all you can do is take a step back, breathe, and follow your first instinct. Try and see both parties neutrally, and select a better candidate from there.


See, I wouldn't call that voting from my gut though. That's a pretty level headed thinking approach if you ask me.

But I can imagine that it IS very hard to try to see the candidates neutrally in the States, given how very... hereditary party affiliation seems to be down there. So I suppose what I'm getting at is that what most people call their "gut" reaction is just a preference instilled in them by their family and immediate community thinking.

That is, naturally, a broad sweeping statement and of course doesn't apply to everyone. [/disclaimer]
_________________
Keeper of Nanashi's Vambraces and the Amethyst Trees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tenshi



Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Posts: 2594
Location: Star Stuff

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LadyYates wrote:
Tenshi wrote:
I don't think voting from your gut, or instinct, is "gutless" really. Sometimes when you're overwhelmed with smear campaigns, all you can do is take a step back, breathe, and follow your first instinct. Try and see both parties neutrally, and select a better candidate from there.


But I can imagine that it IS very hard to try to see the candidates neutrally in the States, given how very... hereditary party affiliation seems to be down there. So I suppose what I'm getting at is that what most people call their "gut" reaction is just a preference instilled in them by their family and immediate community thinking.

That is, naturally, a broad sweeping statement and of course doesn't apply to everyone. [/disclaimer]


Ah, okay. Then using your definition, I completely agree with you. And yes, party affiliation seems to be somewhat hereditary...
_________________
. Dubbed "Usagi" by AsA .
Keeper of the Siderean Swords

"If by chance some day you're not feeling well, and you should remember some silly thing I've said or done, and it brings back a smile to your face or a chuckle to your heart, then my purpose as your clown has been fulfilled."
Red Skelton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
devilman2045
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tinalles wrote:
PCP -- yes, she hasn't traveled until recently. The NY Times reported this:

McCain Chooses Palin, the NY Times wrote:
Ms. Palin appears to have traveled very little outside the United States. In July 2007, she had to get a passport before she visited members of the Alaska National Guard stationed in Kuwait, according to her deputy communications director, Sharon Leighow. She also visited wounded troops in Germany during that trip.


Source for preceding.


----------------------------------------------------


And, since Squee brought it up, I think he's probably right about devilman's rhetorical situation. Devilman, please note that this not an attack on you, or even on your ideas -- it's just an analysis of the environment you're working in and how you approached it.

In most theories of rhetoric, the rhetorical situation consists of three basic parts: the audience, the author (or "rhetor" if you're talking fancy), and the text. Let's look at each of those.

1 First, the rhetor -- devilman2045. He's fairly new to the forum. As of this writing, his profile shows 17 posts overall, most in this thread but a few in the characters section, so he hasn't been around long enough to have a pre-existing reputation. His primary goal is: to get more people to vote for McCain.

Next, the audience. The composition of the forum is:

  • Fairly young, ranging from about 12 to about 30, I'd guess, with the majority in their mid-to-late teens.
  • All over the map politically, ranging from highly conservative to notably liberal. I suspect that more of the forumites lean towards the liberal side of the spectrum than the conservative, because young people tend to be less conservative than older people. That's obviously not a hard-and-fast rule; just a general tendency.
  • Mostly assorted flavors of Christian, with sizable minorities of Jews and agnostics/atheists -- I don't think we've got any Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists, but I could be wrong.
  • Scattered across the planet. I don't think we've got any reliable data on this -- the Earthsong Frappr map lost a lot of data at some point -- but I'm guessing that we have a majority in North America but only a small majority, and a good bit of that is Canadian. The rest are mostly concentrated in north-west Europe and in Israel, with individuals and small groups scattered all over everywhere else in the entire world.


The composition of the forum has big implications for devilman's goals. Since his primary goal is to get people to vote for McCain, he needs to address primarily Americans (and a few people with dual-citizenship like Tamir). But at the same time, the forum is a longstanding community, and the non-American contingent can influence their American friends. So, secondary goal: don't piss off the non-Americans.

2. Let's look at the text now. It's composed of several parts: the thread title, the poll part, the first post, and the movie link.

The thread title is important because it's the first thing that anyone reading the forum will see. It's got to attract their attention and induce them to click the link. The thread title devilman chose is: "Vote for Change - V for Change". I'm not sure why the phrase is repeated, or why "Vote" gets shortened to "V" the second time, but I don't think it really matters. People visited the thread, and I bet they had a pretty good idea going in that it would be about the American election. So it did its job.

3. The text of the first post serves a different purpose. Having gotten people to click the link, he can now start working towards his main goal, which is getting people to vote for McCain.

The approach he took at this point is rather interesting, in a weird sort of way. The post is a monologue, addressed to America. ("Good evening, America" is the first line.) Although the speaker of the monologue is never formally identified, it's reasonably clear that the speaker is supposed to be God.

I can think of two reasons devilman might have done it this way. First, it might have been designed to intrigue the reader, so that he or she would keep reading out of curiosity. It could be trying to inspire the question "Where's he going with this?" so that people will keep reading to find out.

3 (b) The other reason has to do with credibility. A long-time forum member has had time to build up credibility and authority based on hundreds or thousands of posts -- the other forumites know him or her, and will usually be willing to read based on that familiarity. Devilman can't do that, because he hasn't got a personal history at the forum to build on. So instead, he uses ventriloquism: it's not devilman speaking, it's God. Obviously God has oodles of authority. Pretty much the Last Word on anything and everything, by definition.

The curiosity gambit is a reasonably good approach, I think. The fact that it's a monologue doesn't really help. A monologue implies just one person talking, no debate or discussion. Having the monologue spoken by God may well have been a serious mis-step. I suspect some of our more devout members may well find it mildly blasphemous. And of course there's also a long-standing tradition in America that religion and politics ought to be separate. Not everyone feels that way, of course, and there's a sizable number of American who really want religion back in politics, but it's still a risky approach because those who do NOT want religion involved in politics tend to feel very strongly about the matter.

The text is also weird in that God seems to be playing the role of a manager reprimanding a slacker employee, i.e. America. Or possibly humanity -- although the monologue opens by addressing America, it shortly segues into addressing the whole of the human race ("ten thousand years" is a lot longer than America has been around). I do not think that devilman meant to imply that America is the single most important part of humanity, but it came off sounding that way, as the annoyed comments from our non-American members show.

4. But I digress. What I started out to say is that it's kind of weird to cast God as a business manager. It's just ... well, loopy. Businesses are about making money. Money is quintessentially worldly. God is, well, other-worldly. What would he be paying humanity to do, anyway?

5. Anyway, the final weird thing about the post is that it's not actually making a case to get you to vote for John McCain. The poll question attached to it is 'Do you agree with my "Training Video"?' The whole point of the first post was to get us to click the link to the video.

And that link is weird, too, because it doesn't lead to any one video. It leads to a collection of videos, which will change over time. And it doesn't say "Vote for McCain" or anything obvious like that, or at any rate it didn't when I watched it. The video at that point consisted of a whole bunch of snippets of politicians talking, interspersed with screenshots of articles on web pages, and with commentary by the video's producer overlaid on top. It was difficult to both listen to the audio and read the rapidly-changing text. And the scenes changed so rapidly that the flickering made my head hurt. It was also long. Ten minutes? Eleven? By the time a reader gets to the video they've already invested a long time reading the monologue, and may not be willing to invest that much more time in it. I certainly wasn't -- I gave up about about two and a half minutes into the video.

6. It wasn't until the second post that devilman actually said what was on his mind, which is that we should vote for McCain. Which was, by the way, a double-post, which is commonly frowned upon in Internet forums like this one, meaning that by the time devilman communicated his main point, he'd broken one of the community standards. To be fair, double posting is not explicitly discussed in the rules of the forum; it's part of general Internet etiquette. It's also a very common mistake, particularly among new members, so it's not a great sin or anything. It's just annoying.

It looks to me like devilman was writing for a different audience than he actually got. He was writing for people who:

  1. Are American
  2. Are monotheists, and most likely Christians
  3. Don't mind mixing religion and business
  4. Don't mind mixing religion and politics
  5. Like allegory
  6. Don't mind watching long hard-to-follow videos

Well, maybe not the last one. I don't think there are people like that, except maybe for film studies majors, and even they get headaches after a few too many flickering scene changes.

Anyone who meets the first four criteria is probably going to be voting for McCain anyway. So ... what's the point of trying to persuade them to do so? I could hazard some guesses, but I think this post is long enough as it is.

Tips for future advocacy:

  1. Get to the point.
  2. Find out what kind of people you're talking to.
  3. Write for people who don't already agree with you.
  4. Usually people will click a link if you ask them to; you don't need eleven paragraphs of introduction.


I'd like to wrap up by saying that devilman has done a good job of responding to the criticisms people have raised so far. He's responded civilly, and when he's made mistakes he's admitted them gracefully, apologized, and moved on. That strikes me as a good attitude.



Pardon the double post here, but I needed to respond to this.

Notice that a few things arenumbered above in bold that weren't there in the origingal text. I did this to address the issues as they were brought up number wise. Lets begin.....


1. You're right in your overall point. I chose the forum (not fully realizing there were so few Americans) to address not only America, but the world in hopes that they would help influence America, or spread the word in some way. Even by having a friend read a (read also: any) portion of this, then I've completed my first goal of encouraging a world conscience when it comes to voting.

2. The main post, and the monolouge is actually from V for Vendetta. Obviously we have no fans in the forum other than me. I played the part of V. I wrote V for Change hoping someone would realize I reprised the role of V to encourage others to vote for change (All should read as: Vote (and....) for (...whatever you want to) Change.

3. I took a famous Unifying speech hoping to unify my audience, whoever they may be. It doesn't matter if they're unified with me as long as they're unified. The point was to vote. My secondary goal is to have them vote for McCain, which to be quite honest, I really don't care so much about.

3 (b). The point was to play the part of V, and address the entire audience. Again, I had hoped to encourage the world to encourage America, not only to vote, but who to vote for. America is not the most important country in the world. But it is a powerful country. Power should never be mishandled. Thus a statement I quoted from V later: "People should not be afraid of their" establishment, "the" establishment "should be afraid of it's people." Thus makes these things a world issue, wether people want them to be or not.

4. It isn't supposed to be taken literally. It's more of a figurative speech.

5. You're right. The point of the first post is to get you to click the link. But not only that, but to get you to vote. And, in some way, shape or fashion, either through thought provoking speech, or and aggrivating video, to get you to vote (or encourage others to do).

6. It actually wasn't the second post. It was actually several post later that I said what I meant. That I wanted you to vote. I really don't care as to who you vote for. As long as it's on everyones lips, I've done my job. And that was:

1. To get you to vote, by talking about it, and provoking you into it.

2. To have a legit discussion which brings out all the facts.

3. Have the world aware of it's civil duties, and need to encourage everone else to be aware of them.

4. Have people vote (not neccessarily, but preferably with me). (This was mentioned twice cause it needs to be.)
Back to top
sunshine



Joined: 05 Sep 2008
Posts: 592
Location: Up in the Clouds

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Devilman - for future reference, it would make your replies much easier to read and digest if you only quote the parts of a person's post that you're replying to. Or, if you're replying in general to what a person has said, do as most of us do and use the "@ PersonName" format so we know whose post you're referring to and can look back at it ourselves.

And to everyone, I want to thank you all from the bottom of my heart for keeping so admirably civil and mature throughout this entire thread. This forum truly is a poster child for how the internets really should behave! <3
_________________
I do commissions!
Interested? Let me know! :D

My deviantART page

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Ravenna



Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Posts: 637
Location: Toward The Terra

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I feel perhaps I should point out that, from a cultural point of view, the speech from V for Vendetta perhaps wasn't the best one to use to illustrate your point.

While V for Vendetta is fairly recognisible, it was also essentially based upon Alan Moore's fears of a Thatcherite Britain that had decayed into a dictatorship, and while the film itself was updated to be more comprensible to the audiences of the 2000s, it is very much an echo of anxieties of 1980s Britain.

I'm not trying to be nasty, or jump on a criticism bandwagon, and I apolgise if this comes across as such. It's simply not my intention. I just felt I ought to point out that V for Vendetta has some very strong political imagery, which unfortunately I felt was not entirely appropriate to the conversation.
_________________
Bernard [about the job]: The pay's not great, but the work is hard.
~ Black Books ~
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 4 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Elveron phpBB theme/template by Ulf Frisk and Michael Schaeffer
Copyright Ulf Frisk, Michael Schaeffer 2004


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group