Billions and Billions

This story is, to coin a phrase, fascinating:

An Alien Earth May Be in Our Cosmic Back Yard

"Looking at thousands of red dwarf stars in the Kepler field, the lead investigator (Courtney Dressing from the Center for Astrophysics) found several dozen stars with candidate planets (probable companions that have not yet been confirmed). Out of those, she found three that were about the size of Earth, as well as being in their stars’ habitable zones, the right distance from their stars to have liquid water. Accounting for planets with orbits that don’t let them transit from our view, what she found is that 6 percent of red dwarf stars have Earth-sized planets at the right distance from the star to be potentially habitable.

That’s 1 out of 16. Out of 75 billion stars. That’s a lot of Earths. In fact, using that number and applying some statistics, Dressing and her team calculate that on average, in this part of the galaxy, Earth-like planets are only 13 light-years apart. That’s a long way to walk, but in galactic terms, that’s incredibly close. Only about three-dozen stars are known that are within 13 light-years of Earth. Could one of them bear a planet like home?"

It boggles the mind that, finally, soon, astronomers in the next 1-2 generations may actually be able to confidently say whether life might exist on other planets throughout the cosmos.

If we can determine the likelihood of life-bearing worlds, we can determine the likelihood of life.

Planets have to fall under certain criteria to have the potential to bear life as we know it. They have to be in a certain habitable "zone" around the sun - within a certain range of radii, to get that "not too hot, not too cold" effect, so liquid water can exist. Likelihood of greenhouse effect, density, etc - all these traits of worlds should eventually come into focus as better and better detection techniques are developed. Eventually, hopefully, astronomers will be able to point to some planet orbiting some star under some particular conditions and say, "Yes, it as a statistical probability that life exits on that world."

Of course, until we are able to visit such a planet (or, miraculously, contact it's inhabitants) we can't know anything for absolute sure. Heck, we live right next door to Mars and as of early 2013 we're still not sure if life ever existed there at all. But we know exponentially more about the possibility of Martian life now than we did even 15 years ago. I would predict if life on Mars exists, or ever did exist, we'll likely know for sure within the next 20 years. We're that close. So based on this article we're also very close, statistically speaking, to making a good, firm prediction about the probability of life on planets outside our solar system.

After years and years of fictional speculation about people loving on other planets around the galaxy - after imagining the lives of people living on Vulcan, Tatooine, Gallifrey, Arakis, Centauri Prime, Caprica, Tangaroa, Krypton, Hala, Aiur and many others - to imagine that the basic building blocks of such a larger universe, habitable planets, may actually exist and that we may confirm it in our lifetime is staggering.

Overreaction of the Week

A lot of people and organizations are in a tizzy over companies editing their own Wikipedia pages:

Last year a Wikipedia visitor edited the entry for the SeaWorld theme parks to change all mentions of “orcas” to “killer whales,” insisting that this was a more accurate name for the species.

There was another, unexplained edit: a paragraph about criticism of SeaWorld’s “lack of respect toward its orcas” disappeared. Both changes, it turns out, originated at a computer at Anheuser-Busch, SeaWorld’s owner.

Last year, someone at PepsiCo deleted several paragraphs of the Pepsi entry that focused on its detrimental health effects. In 2005, someone using a computer at Diebold deleted paragraphs that criticized the company’s electronic voting machines. That same year, someone inside Wal-Mart Stores changed an entry about employee compensation.

Jimmy Wales, founder of the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, says the site discourages such “conflict of interest” editing. “We don’t make it an absolute rule,” he said, “but it’s definitely a guideline.”

Internet experts, for the most part, have welcomed WikiScanner. “I’m very glad that this has been exposed,” said Susan P. Crawford, a visiting professor at the University of Michigan Law School. “Wikipedia is a reliable first stop for getting information about a huge variety of things, and it shouldn’t be manipulated as a public relations arm of major companies.”

Here's what bothers me. It's the purpose of sites like Wikipedia to be as accurate as possible. I think the truth and accurate facts is everyone's goal. Well, who's going to be more knowledgeable about the truth in an organization, assuming it has nothing to hide, than the organization itself?

If the people who work at Sea World say they know more about the etymology of their animals than Joe Orcafan in Cleveland who's been there once but decided to take it upon himself to "update" the Sea World page - well, who are you going to feel has access to more trustworthy data?

It even is more important to clear away editorial data, like the diatribe against the captivity of killer whales that was on the Sea World site and subsequently deleted by an employee. It's fine to criticize something if you feel strongly about it, but a page like Wikipedia could include hundreds of different, even conflicting opinions regarding the treatment of their animals if allowed to.

If someone wants to acknowledge there is controversy, that's fine but make it a link on the page to another site that addresses the controversy directly - not there with the description.

I have no problem whatsoever with a company editing their own Wikipedia page. A lot of paranoid conspiracy enthusiasts will readily see demons and ulterior motives behind every edit, but it's mostly nonsense. It's in a company's best interest to provide factual information about their organization, and if there's a site out there that is providing false or misleading or biased information that purports to be, as Wikipedia likes to think of itself, as an "authority" on these subjects, then they have the right to set the record straight.

My company was in just a predicament one time. A Wikipedia page about one of our affiliates was edited to include some horribly biased, inaccurate information. We contacted the Wikipedia management and it was removed with more basic, truthful information restored. And the page was locked from further intrusion. To some that's corporate hands overreaching their bounds - to me it's responsible stewardship of online information.

Who You Looking At?

I haven't done a lot of deep posting lately, so here's your chance -- nay, your privilege and opportunity -- to explore my mind...

Russ McBee has some thoughts regarding an ABC News Poll about how Americans feel about arbitrary video camera surveillance:

The question in the poll was worded this way:

Some people support the use of surveillance cameras in public places as a way to help solve crimes. Others say these cameras go too far as a government intrusion on personal privacy. What’s your opinion – do you support or oppose the increased use of surveillance cameras in public places?

Although I think the results may have been different if the question had consisted merely of the third sentence and omitted the first two, I find it shocking that 71 percent said they favored surveillance cameras, and only 25 percent were opposed.

I can understand his point, and I basically agree with the premise that the government has no business sticking a camera in my face, asking, "ARE YA GUILTY??? ARE YA??? HUH? HUH? NO? ok, nevermindmovealong....."

However, although I generally agree with his contentions, I'm not libertarian by any stretch of the imagination, and a few of his arguments strike me as...well, as a little paranoid....

Seventy-one percent of the American people apparently don't think the Fourth Amendment means anything, or that it was added for no good reason. Seventy-one percent of the American public has lost sight of the fact that unfettered police power not only can be abused, it will be abused. It's a metaphysical certainty that innocent people, minding their own business, would be tracked and monitored.

Ok, let's take a quick look at the Fourth Amendment:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I really despise hyperbole. In this case, exaggerating both a problem, and the response to it. First of all, I don't believe being "secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects" applies to being videotaped in a public place. I know in my business, there are public events that have photos taken of various attendees. Normally in small, private situations such as inside the hospital photo releases would need to be obtained by all subjects of a photo before it could be published. But when you're outside at a public event, like a golf tournament or charity race, you have no expectation of identity privacy - anyone can see you, and anyone can take your picture when it's related to your attendance at the event. That way we don't have to get releases for 10,000 people downtown at a race. If you're walking down a public street, anyone can take your picture as long as they're not harassing you to get it - that's how paparazzi can take photos of celebrities. I may not like it, but I can't consider a video camera taping me coming out of Mast General in downtown Knoxville as removing the security of my person, house, paper or effects. Now, if the camera were capable to recording what I had in my pockets, my wallet, anything placed on my person with an expectation of privacy - that's different. But they can't and won't do that, so it doesn't apply.

Secondly, he says, "71% of Americans don't think the 4th Amendment means anything". Again, that's a huge exaggeration. Even allowing for a little bit of emphasis for effect, just because one person interprets the amendment one way, that doesn't mean I have to interpret it the same way. I think the 4th Amendment is extremely important - I just don't agree that I "don't feel it means anything" just because I differ in my interpretation.

And do people really consider video cameras on the street corners "unfettered police power"? Really? Unfettered? One would equate breaking down doors in the middle of the night, dragging off political dissenters while shooting their families to be the equivelant of monitoring for purse-snatchers and jaywalkers? If there's an argument that exists for equating the two examples of loss of civil liberties, I'd like to hear it.

Being free from unwarranted search is fundamental to the American notion of liberty. Surrendering our privacy to police cameras would be no different from allowing police to stop people randomly on the street and demand to see their papers.

Again, I don't see random videoing to be the equivalent of stopping and asking for papers. Asking for papers is a way for the police determining if you, Joe Innocent, has the right to be doing what you're doing and to be where you are, and that you are indeed who you say you are. It also actively disrupts your life. Being videoed merely records your presence, to be compared to known criminals. While neither may be wanted or entirely private, they are not the equivalent of the other.

We decided collectively a long time ago that the police may not search us without a good reason to do so. Blanket surveillance, whether instigated by the White House or by local authorities, is anathema to our history and our values.

Liberty cannot exist without a fundamental right to privacy, even when walking down the street.

Again, I don't think being videotapes means being searched. The items that the public cannot see when walking down the street, from papers to wallets to the insides of purses to pockets, remain undetected even with the most sophisticated cameras. When actively searched by police or asked for "papers", then the 4th amendment would apply. (Now, if they do develop and utilize cameras that can videotape what's in my pockets or my wallet, then we have a mighty big problem. Also a fun toy at frat parties.)

Bottom line: you have a right to privacy, except for that which you willfully give up when going out in public. When in public, you are who you are and that face you choose show to the outside world is public property. Having it videotaped, while not the best answer in the world, is certainly not the same as giving up your privacy.

This kind of hyperbole is not helpful to win others to a cause. Careful presentation of the facts and not exaggeration are better at making a case.

The New Phone Book's Here! The New Phone Book's Here! *

My part of the Dell saga is over - it arrived yesterday. I've assembled the basic essential components (monitor, sound, power, Lego Star Wars) and will attempt to transplant the cable modem from the old to the new.

Interestingly, I haven't located:

a) a manual for either the monitor or the PC. Perhaps they're on the myriad of CD's that came with each

b) a parallel printer port on the PC (say that three times fast). I'm a bit concerned, as I don't know if our printer has a USB connector.

The monitor is astoundingly huge - 22". It fills up the monitor width cubby on my desk, but being a flat screen now there's a lot of room in front of it to set manuals, paper, pencils, packs of crackers, glasses of tea, medium-sized cats, etc.

No Dell elf (Delf?) was kind enough to secretly install an extra GB of memory, just 'cause.... but that's ok. I didn't expect it, certainly. That's the only bad point thus far, because assembly and shipping was lightning quick. I placed the order last Tuesday and had it in hand last night. Sweet.

* Special prize to anyone besides Michael or Becky who knows the quote

A Small Amelioration

Got an email yesterday from Dell, that my new PC had already been shipped and would be here in 3-5 business days.

A small Woot for Dell. Their standard business practices are in fine working order, which is why I like them overall. It's their inability to be flexible when necessary that bothers me.

I Resent the Insinuation, Thank You...

Urban Word of the Day
www.urbandictionary.com

June 15, 2007: digital immigrant

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=digital+immigrant&defid=894212

Someone who grew up before the digital age and is fairly new to the internet. Basically anyone over the age of 28.

YouTube is foreign to the digital immigrant.

Customer Support - Pt 2

[Continued from here]

On the Phone

So when we last left our heroes, I was forced to pick up the phone and actually place a phone call. Muster up your midichlorians, young padawan.. Ok.

I dialed the number in the email and spoke to someone almost immediately. Points there... I believe her name was Michelle, but she had an accent so it was difficult to tell if I was talking to Austin, India, Outer Mongolia, or a Jarada. She was polite, and eventually informed me I that since I had already placed an order, I had to speak to someone in the Order Modification department. And she transferred me.

Ok. Order Modificatin sounded vaguely Orwellian, but I was willing to play along for the moment. The next person I spoke to (again, a lady with an accent but an American name) was not in the Order Modification department, and was not hesitant to inform me of that fact after a few moments of wrangling and re-iterating my problem. She transferred me, once again, to Order Modification. Or tried to.

I think I got the main switchboard at that point, in which I needed to talk to someone in Order Modification. The helpful switchboard operator (too bad it wasn't Pam...) transferred me to....somewhere. I think it was the Sales Department. The lady there, this time with an American accent, was somewhat more helpeful although she told me there was no such thing as an Order Modification Department... strange. Anyway, I went over my problem with her in great detail.

Here's the problem as I explained. I just bought, through Dell, a new computer system that was - in my mind - applicable for a free memory upgrade offer advertised on their website. In plain words it said they would provide a free upgrade from 1GB to 2GB memory with the purchase of a C521 Desktop with X2 4000+ processor. Their contention was that if I wasn't offered the option of choosing the free upgrade during the order process, then the offer wasn't applicable.

Now, if you've never purchased a Dell system online you start at the beginning with the model of PC and work through screen-by-screen choosing, accepting or modifying various options along the way. I got the opportunity when building my system to choose the type of monitor I wanted, how much memory, type of video card, etc. According to them since on the Memory screen I wasn't given the opportunity to choose the free 2GB upgrade option, it wasn't applicable here.

My contention continued to be that the ad explicitly specified the criteria for the upgrade was a particular model/processor combination, which my selection fulfilled, and they needed to honor the advertised promotion and give me the free upgrade.

I wasn't snotty about it, simply expecting them to honor the upgrade offer that they advertised.

The Customer Service rep said the only way I could get the free memory upgrade was to have her cancel my existing order, and to go back and rebuild my system from the ground up - this time adding in the option for free memory. I told her that was never an option for me the first time around, and she asserted that it was. So we were at an impasse. Since we were at an impasse, she offered to let me speak to someone with some more authority, so I agreed. A 10-minute wait on hold followed.

tap tap tap...

I would've hung up, except I seemed to be working my way up the ladder - hopefully to someone who had the authority to simply pull up the order form, verify the terms of the offer and upgrade the memory themselves. Similar to the enchilada problem in the first post, none of the employees I had spoken to were empowered to sidestep corporate policy and try to do the right thing for a customer. Up to that point, a loyal customer. And we're only talking about a $100 upgrade, at best (that's how much it would've cost me to upgrade the memory myself on the order screen and pay for it).

During the hold, I actually went through and started two more orders - one from the link I started from, and the other beginning from the Dell Home/Home Office page. I soon discovered that starting from the Dell site builds a slightly different C521 package, one that does indeed automatically give you the option of a free memory upgrade but does not include the monitor. The resulting comparison of the two systems differed by almost $250, with my system being the much better deal. So I could see what was going on, slightly.

I finally talked to another lady who was actually quite helpful. She understood my contention, we spoke about the two different ways to build the systems and that one gave the option for the memory upgrade and one only gave the monitor addition option. According to her, there are special package offers all over the web that aren't covered in existing promotions like the memory upgrade.

I told her I completely understood the distinction and the Dell-originated C521 order process is the only one that had the upgrade offer built-in, but that according to the wording of the promotion on their own website, no distinction was made. She seemed to agree with me but was powerless to do anything about it. She offered to speak to her manager.

I was a bit hopeful.

For only a moment, however, because she came back and confirmed yet again there was nothing they could do, that the upgrade could only be applied through the other offer. I hesitated to play the "I'm a loyal customer and need to be taken care of if you want my business in the future" card because I think it's tacky and childish...although I did float it out at one point and the bait wasn't even nibbled at, so I didn't pursue. I even considered saying, "I'm going to so blog about this...and then you guys will be sorry!!!" but decided against that as well :)

I considered asking to speak to the manager myself but at that point was tired of talking on the phone and ready to eat lunch. So I thanked her for her assistance, complimented her on her knowledge of the products and ordering system and patience (much more than any of the previous "Customer Service Reps" I had spoken to). She apologized for not being able to do anything and that was that.

Final Thoughts

What was clearly to me a matter of honoring an advertised offer became a case of red tape and one group not talking to the other. Advertising an upgrade as being for certain well-defined systems, but not including the offer to all system builds was a mistake on their part. That, or the person that wrote the copy for the advertisement forgot or was not informed that only systems built from the Dell site were applicable. Again, a breakdown in communications. Better communications would've alleviated a lot of confusion.

But employee empowerment, to me, was the bigger problem. That and allowing Customer Service employees to actually address specific problems without the endless transfer cycle. Only when I went either to the more individual department and higher up the command chain, did I find people with knowledge of the products and offers they were supporting. However, none of them (as far up as I went) were willing or able to bend the rules a bit to right a wrong, make a customer happy, and give a win for everyone involved. As I said before, all it took was a tap-tap on the keyboard by someone with the power to change an order, then make a note in a log that a customer's day was brightened. The blog entry would've ended on a happier note, some good PR might've been spread around, and Dell would've benefited - all for about $100, the price they were eating for the upgrade. Actually a lot less than that because that was their retail price, and I wasn't going to buy it anyway.

So all you employers out there - my advice is to trust your employees, let them use their intelligence and wisdom, and give them some latitude to make changes that please the customer and cement that long-term relationship so many companies crave. Whether it's cars, clothes, hospitals, computers....or enchiladas.



Follow-up

Do you think I should lodge a complaint of any kind? I'm debating it, and not sure...

Customer Support - Pt 1

(A bit of a long post, so be patient)

The Background

Recently Will had an interesting experience at a local (to him) Mexican eatery:

I ate at a restaurant that I usually don’t eat at [...] but I won’t be eating there again.

The problem is that all of their enchilada plates only came with two enchiladas. I’m a three enchilada guy at least, four if I forgo the rice and beans or if I’m really hungry. Two just whets my appetite. I asked the waiter if I could pay extra to get a third enchilada and he told me that they didn’t sell enchiladas a la carte. If I wanted that third enchilada, I had to order a second plate and spend a whopping $13 for four enchiladas for lunch.

Whether I go to a place or not depends on whether or not I can get what I want. So nevermind the extra buck they would have made by charging me two for an enchilada, they’ve lost my business.

I commented:

I think a lot of restaurant businesses, especially those that are more fast-serving than others, are so tied to the buttons on their cash register there’s no room for improvising. If there’s not a button on there for “Double cheeseburger with extra pickles and a little relish” then you can’t have it that way because there’s no way to ring it up.

And in a sit-down place like a Mexican restaurant the employees may have been given explicit instructions from the management not to make up special orders because they don’t want to give the waiters and managers the power to set prices on non-standard items. While it would seem a no-brainer to sell one enchilada a la carte for $3.50 when a two-plater costs $7, what do they do when someone wants a special three turkey tacos, two guacamole enchiladas, an all-bean burrito and a side of vegetarian con queso? I wouldn’t even know how to start pricing that one, so the owners probably say NO SPECIAL ORDERS, period.

It doesn’t make sense to be short-sighted enough not to offer a la carte in the first place, but that’s what I think the reason is at that restaurant.

The bottom line is that in some establishments, most particularly franchises of large chains or bureaucracy-heavy national companies, employees and managers are not given any freedom to improvise service for customers that have special requests or needs. If an item or combination is not on the menu, it's simply not available. No breaking up a $3.50 2-taco combo into 1 taco for $1.75 for you because management won't allow it, it's not on the register, I don't know how much to charge, there's no way to record it, it'll mess up the bookkeeping, etc. This can be frustrating for the consumer that expects good customer service.

Now, this doesn't excuse some consumers who want special treatment for everything and get frustrated when the employee doesn't bend over backward for their every need. There's a middle ground that is difficult for some consumers to reach as well. So we're not entirely blameless.

But still, giving more flexibility to front-line employees and mid-level managers to adapt goods and services to the immediate needs of the customer would be a smart idea for any business.

Case in point for me, Dell Computers.

Dell Computers

Some background: About 5 years ago I bought a Dell Dimension 4100 desktop system online, and have been quite happy with the setup. Now that BrainyBoy is entering middle school I figured it was time to give him that PC and upgrade the family unit. A few days ago I saw an online promotion at Slickdeals.net, an online site that finds good deals for merchandise across the web. The link led straight to the Dell website, and I was able to follow the online process and get a nice new Dimension C521 Desktop.

(specs if anyone's interested)
* AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 4000+
* Genuine Windows XP Home Edition
* 1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz- 2DIMMs
* 160GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/ DataBurst Cache
* 16X DVD-ROM Drive
* 20 inch E207WFP Widescreen Digital Flat Panel
* NVIDIA GeForce 6150 LE Integrated Graphics GPU
* Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio

Anyway, the great thing about the promotion was the Digital Flat Panel monitor was included, which knocked about $250 off what the total price could have been. In fact, I added an additional $40 to bump the monitor up to a 22" model. Sweet :)

But I digress.

Anyway, as I'm placing the order I notice a separate promotion prominently featured all over the Dell site offering a free 1GB to 2GB memory upgrade with purchase of a C521 system with Athlon X2 4000+ processer. Double sweet! The problem was I couldn't find any instructions on how to apply the upgrade to an existing order. My order was placed and being processed (with an additional bonus of free 3-5 day shipping - triple sweet!!) but no notice that the 1GB to 2GB upgrade was automatically applied.

Customer Support - Chat and Email

So I started the customer support route. The Award Winning Dell Customer Service. First I tried the revolutionary Online Chat service - a very handy tool, actually. I was connected to a live rep...somewhere. Actually, I eventually spoke to about 3 different Online Chat Reps, and each was unhelpful, referring me to a different Chat area. Finally I gave up, as Online Chat support was unable to provide any useful information. In each case I provided them with specific information on the system I had bought, the memory upgrade promotion, and what I was expecting Dell to provide via terms of the offer.

Next I tried the regular customer support email route (note that I am always loathe to talk face-to-face via phone to tech or customer support... I am not a good phone talker, and prefer to take time to sort out my thoughts and facts on a keyboard rather than try to remember everything I need to know at the spur of the moment). I emailed the customer support rep with a detailed explanation of my problem:

I have just purchased, through Dell, a Dimension C521 system with an Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 4000+ processor.

The advertisement listed as going through June 13, 2007:

http://www.dell.com/content/topics/promo.aspx/fy08/q2wk06_dt_mem?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd&~ck=ticker&~lt=popup

says free upgrades from 1GB to 2GB are available for C521 purchasers. I would like to know how to go about getting that free 1GB to 2GB memory upgrade.

Thank you,

Here's the reply I got, the next day (Tuesday afternoon)

Thank you for contacting Dell.

I understand from your email that you wish to know how to upgrade the memory from 1GB to 2GB. I will certainly assist you withis request.

I request you to contact the sales department at 800-284-3355 so that they would assist you in making the necessary order modifications.

Dell records reflect that order number xxxxxxxx was placed on 06-11-07.

The estimated ship date of order number xxxxxxxx is 6/18/2007. The estimated date of delivery is 6/21/2007-6/25/2007.

So, as you can see, email tech support was unhelpful, did not address the actual problem at all, and instructed me to call customer support by phone.

*sigh*

Yesterday afternoon I took some time to begin the phone trail.... the fun was just beginning....

[To Be Continued]

The Naked Emperor

I know MySpace is the most popular spot on the web these days, along with YouTube and the various Google properties...

Networking sites are all the rage, along with some like Yahoo 360, Facebook, Frappr and MyBlogLog

But the granddaddy of them all is MySpace, which apparently anyone who is anyone has a MySpace page.

Why is MySpace so popular? Because it's popular, as I read somewhere a while back. It's a self-popularizing website - "Everybody has a MySpace page, so I have to, too."

Any band worth its salt has a MySpace page, they're not taken seriously until they do. And there are other examples.

But what nobody seems to want to talk about is how mind-numbingly ugly MySpace sites are...

I've been a web designer for 10 years, and have seen sites evolved from the ever-popular <blink></blink>'ing text to content crammed into every imaginable corner, to minimalist design and maximum interactivity.

But MySpace is so...it's just so badly designed to be laughable. Features are strewn haphazardly about, graphics and videos that people are encouraged to post force extra-wide screens requiring side-scrolling, topdown-scrolling, diagonal-scrolling, longways-scrolling and every scrolling imagineable. The color backgrounds are blinding and the text unreadable. Columns bump into each other and paragraphs of text overlap. Yet everyone continues to accept this as where you have to be.

It's too bad we as web consumers don't demand better from the sites we frequent. I personally can't stand visiting anyone's MySpace page because I know it's going to be an incoherent mess of animated graphics, unwanted indie bands (ok, that's my own prejudice there) and unreadable content.

This Emperor not only has no clothes, they're really, really, really ugly. And no one will tell him about it.

More Tech Etiquette

Now I don't want to go off on a rant here..--



Wait, you know what? Yes I do.




Please indulge me to rant about e-mail for just a moment. Specifically, email habits in the business and group hobby world (in this case, community theatre).

As we continue deep into the 2nd week of rehearsals for "Suessical", it has become somewhat critical that we fill several major holes in our cast. Three main characters have yet to find actors, which is not a good thing.

[Side note - if you are or you know a young performer (ages 12-25) that would be interested in performing, PLEASE let me know]

Starting last week, when we knew we'd have to start searching for replacements I began calling in contacts of various local theatre and musical people I know. I asked their assistance in giving me names of folks they've worked with in the past that might be interesting in joining our show. These are high schoolers, mostly, with some middle schoolers thrown in.

In total over the past two weeks I received about 15 different email addresses of possible cast members. In most cases, the emails were for their parents. In addition, I gathered email addresses for some cast members of last year's "The King and I" and sent the invitation to participate out to them as well. All in all, in the past week and a half, I've sent out approximately 20 emails to different area performers and parents, either to see if they or their kids had any interest in being in the show, or to request they check some of their contacts.

Since then, I received one reply. One. That was from a dad of a kid who was interested in being in the show.

I heard nothing else from anyone I sent emails to. Not a "thanks, not interested." Not a "thanks, I'll see if I'll check my schedule." Not a "thanks, let me see if I can find anybody for you." Not a "thanks, I don't think I can really help you."

Nothing.

Here's the scoop. If someone sends you a personal email with some kind of call to action, reply to it. It can be as simple as, "thanks." That's it - just acknowledge receipt. If someone walked up to you on the street and asked you a question or if you would do them a favor would you just ignore them and keep walking? Of course not, you'd stop, say hi and respond in some way.

If you have an email address and you give out that email address to the world as a contact point, you have just as much obligation to check it and respond as if you gave someone your phone number.

But then there are people who screen calls with caller ID or answering machines and only answer or respond to those people they want to talk to. In other words, it's all about themselves - not others.

Email contact is huge and only going to get bigger. You may miss out on an important opportunity, or contact with an old friend. I doubt I'll be contacting any of these people again soon to be in a show.



But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Another Cell Phone Etiquette Question

You leave your cell phone lying on the table, and come back and see someone has called but not left a voice mail. Do you call them back anyway and see what they wanted (assuming it tells you who called)?

Cell Phone Voice Mail

Does anyone actually check the voice mail on their cell phones?

I've left business messages on two peoples' cell phones in the last two days, specifically explaining my requests and asking them to call me back. I was fairly explicit in the importance of my call.

So far, I've heard back from neither of them. I'm reasonably sure at least one of them is in town, but it's possible they aren't.

Incidentally, both of them are women if that makes a difference.

Do you return cell phone voice mails promptly, especially those that aren't strictly personal? Do you give it a few days to stew? Do you ignore them? Or do you even check voice mail?