Sellsius real estate marketing blog

It's worth $150, just to watch Brian vomit. :-)

In time, the RE blogosphere will mature and begin to realize how immature and petty mr. bloodhog actually is--not unintelligent mind you--just self-serving and arrogant. As this natural maturation occurs, his readership will dwindle. His purebred hubris will be his undoing. He is certainly no community leader by any measure, and his mechanizations will flounder in a more social online world.

Hold on!! I'm getting my popcorn...

Joe, I agree. Based on his rebuttal to my comment, it appeared he was upset regarding the use of unchained…

“He doesn’t understand the ideas he’s trying to steal, and he’s so clueless that he swiped the defining metaphor without even realizing it.”

Ok… one made reference to music… the other, his dog? Both are the passions of each poster from which they draw inspiration to convey a message.

Like you, what bothers me is the lack of respect he displays towards just about anyone who seeks to contribute to the RE community at large, simply because he thinks they don’t understand his (a RE agents) world, the re.net or in this case, the perceived association of a word to the BHB.

As you allude to with the ad hominem reference, maybe he didn’t take the time to read the author’s bio?

re.net nailed it.

I am a mere pup when it comes to blogging, but I realized after just a couple of posts that I wasn't interested in his pompous drivel. My online life has been considerable less stressful since.

BHB does have one very useful feature. That is the ability to subscribe to individual authors.

I wish Russell and Jay would post more.

Another blog war.... *yawn*

The problem with real estate bloggers is simple: We kiss too much ass. We virtually depend on one another for comments helps keeping our articles and posts up to date and heaven knows what else.

One person writes something which another disagees with and all hell breaks loose.

But it's not just the bloggers themselves who suffer. Take me for example: A few back we have Tomato and RSS Pieces. Now I have wrote an article for Jim and he has a copy of a second I wrote. Yet when I disagree with Mary or one of her clients over stuff they wrote, it seems like I am trying to attack them over asking a simple question.

I have both sites on my links page - I enjoy reading both, but it seems like with so much ass kissing and junk going on, you either belong to one camp or the other.

Same with the other sites who engage in this mess. If you make comments on one sites, you are automatically placed in their camp it seems. Kind of like the Cold War (my research thesis this semester) - you're either a Patriot or a Communist.
--
Greg Tracy: scoot on over, you got the popcorn and I got the beer!

Derek - really struggling to see how Joe is kissing Greg's ass...

Charles - Thanks!

Jay:

Not saying Joe is.. but real estate bloggers in general do a lot of it!

They depend too heavily on each other for their own success (comments, writing posts on their blogs, etc) and when one person disagrees with something another writes, it seems all hell breaks loose.

Then when things do break loose, it seems many others tend to get put into one camp or the other.

It's kind of like myspace, one friend gets pissed at another, writes a blog and then all the other friends who are listed as the other's friend gets shoved in the middle between the two. Their comments gets censored, they get banned and heaven knows what else.

The point of the post is Greg Swann has a comment policy which holds people to a certain standard of behavior. Violation of that policy results in blacklisting from his blog (forget for a moment he said he would never blacklist and is purportedly a transparent free speech advocate).

Swann has repeatedly violated his own standards by insulting fellow bloggers and flame baiting. I don't know about the rest of the campers, but IMO the insults he regularly spews would get a commenter banned with no problem. As a result, he should rightly ban himself.

The bottom line is hypocrisy--- in his word and his deeds. And this is the person who would guide other bloggers? The good shepard? Oh my goodness. Call Nurse Ratched, I'm gonna need my medication.

I will not live long enuf to see Joe's lips in close proximity to Greg's posterior :)
Where did I leave my beer and popcorn?

Pass the salt and real butter for my popcorn, please.

There seem to be those that enjoy heavy duty bantering and abuse. And still others who don't engage in that type of behavior.

Many times what we see in others, we don't seem to see in ourselves or feel that the rules don't apply to us.

I think this might be true of Bloodhound. Some will do ANYTHING to increase traffic and some have morals and scruples.

Guess you just have to know where you stand and just how far you will go...integrity is at stake.

Thanks guys for sticking your neck out and taking a stand.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the absudity of Greg Swann's attacks on other professionals in the real estate industry.

I posted this the other night on his blog. I've never posted anything before, but I was upset reading what he wrote. I also followed up yesterday with another post and direct e-mail. None of which, not suprisingly, made it past the moderator (Greg) on his blog comments.

Zach Goldwater February 13th, 2008 11:24 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I've read your blog maybe 10 times. This one turned me off completely. Actually, I'm appalled. Was this "nebbish" character someone you were partners with and he stole a fortune from you or did he sleep with your wife or something? What did he do that was so offensive to you?

I'd also be curious to know, with all your pontification about real estate, just how many sales you had last year, Greg? Was it two, maybe 3? I think I'll check the stats with the title company rep I use and find out. I bet your productions sucks, much like your attitude to your fellow man.

I'm amazed at how you attack someone in your profession. You are a cheap shot artist who is down right mean and ugly. Anyone who supports a blog like this is equally disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself. It's too bad, sometimes you guys write some interesting things. All I can say is you lost me. And, if I ever come across you in a deal of any kind, I'll walk from the commission rather than do a deal with you.

Now I know why a dog is on your signs.

fromZach Goldwater
toGregSwann@bloodhoundrealty.com,
dateFri, Feb 15, 2008 at 10:48 PM
subject: That's what I thought... my comments awaiting moderation....

mailed-bygmail.com

You can bad mouth others in your blog, but you keep my comments off your blog. What are you afraid of, Greg? Being exposed as a non-producing big mouth? Is that so bad? I guess what's good for the goose isn't what's good for the gander.

I did check out your production by the way. I was right! Your sales, much like you treat certain people, suck. You sure don't sell a lot of real estate, Greg. I guess you are too busy picking on others. Kicking others to make yourself feel better - that's really big of you.

Perhaps you should be a better human being and stop tearing people down. Maybe good karma will come back around and you can put maybe another sold sign on one of your properties.

In 15 years, I've never had such harsh comments for a fellow real estate professional.

How could I not click through to see the full post from my Google Reader?

My prediction: the Realtor Code of Ethics will be used more in coming months in ethics cases against Realtor bloggers. One potentially leaves a perpetual trail of evidence in a blog post.

"And this is the same fellow who would take your $350 ($149 if you act now– it’s a limited time offer, folks) to teach you how to bite off a chunk. Just make sure you get your shots."

Joe, I've always liked you. I was one of your first subscribers to your site. I organized a get together for your BlogTourUSA. I suppose that's why I'm shocked that you would openly discourage participation in my conference. A conference with substantial time and money investment from me.

I guess I'll never understand the depth of your pettiness. While I sometimes disagree with you, I can't imagine publicly discouraging people from patronizing your law practice, your classified ads community, or your real estate brokerage.

I am, literally, sitting here, jaw dropped at this unprofessional behavior. My good sense instructs me to fight back against anyone who would publicly tarnish my business endeavors but that would just satisfy the rest of the haters.

Brian --- I don't know you, Joe, or Greg personally --- but I don't think Joe was discouraging people from participating in *your* conference --- but rather Greg's conference. My understanding is that you and Greg are the two heading it up, and despite how much anyone might want to come to a Brian Brady conference, it seems pretty reasonable that someone would decide not to come to that conference because it involves Greg, especially based on his latest outburst.

Dear Brian,

I thank you and have appreciated your support. And I like you as a person, always have. But I respectfully disagree with your portrayal of the post as petty and not a justified opinion to Swann's personal attack against a FELLOW blogger. If I may.

First, I was unaware it was YOUR conference, since it's promoted as a Bloodhound conference-- unchained, as in dog, right? Nonetheless, my statement makes NO reference to you, but to Greg Swann, who I take it will be contributing in no small way. To the extent Greg Swann is contributing to the Conference, in my opinion it is ironic that one who would callously demean a FELLOW blogger would want to get paid for blogging advice. Is all the money going to you, Brian? If so, I will amend the statement--But if any is going to Swann, the statement will be amended to something like: "ask for a further discount for the portion going to Greg".

Second, if I am guilty of discouraging a conference by that statement (as I said, I was referring to the irony, given GS's behavior), your blog patriarch, Greg Swann, is equally guilty by penning discouraging blog posts:

1. he discouraged going to the Inman Connect (at Inman's blog, no less), an event he NEVER attended. Classless by anyone's standard. How do you feel about that, if you care to answer?
2. he discouraged the Blog Tour --even made a nice Bert & Ernie video-- kinda clever. Russell did a nice face on the bus parody. You had no problem with that, did you? Didn't think so.
3. I think he also discouraged other events or vendors but I don't have the inclination to look them up for you. But I banked 2 for you.

So, if you hold me accountable, I hope your moral compass is set to hold Greg Swann equally accountable for the same offense. Are you?

Third, the point of the post is not petty IMO. You will have to explain how calling a fellow blogger a mental midget, little nebbish, and a slug is NOT a personal attack, NOT a violation of BHB policy and that it is OK in your blog book. I will ask you point blank: In your opinion, did Greg Swann make a personal attack in that post? If you answer nothing else here, please answer that. If that is acceptable behavior to you, I'd like to hear it out of your mouth.

I'm sorry Brian, Gena is right on this-- integrity is at stake. I stand up for what I believe in. And I believe Marc Davison is not deserving of such continued petty & demeaning abuse. This is how I express my point of view--- my apologies if it offends your sensibilities.

Fourth, this post would have been a comment left at the cod piece post had I not been on the BHB blacklist. Ironic isn't it?

Fifth, to characterize those who would disagree with Swann's verbal assaults as "haters" is unfair. Just because someone takes offense at GS's behavior does not qualify them to wear your hater badge. It is a crummy buzzword label anyway. I would use the label "principled"

Finally, I find it odd (I could use the word petty) that you would chose to object to the one statement that might affect your pocketbook and overlook the big picture. Sometimes, it's not about the money Brian.

"Sometimes, it’s not about the money Brian"

Joe, that's the garden variety response when caught putting your hand's in someone else's pocket.

You knew full well that this conference was my brainchild and venture (with full support and equal investment from Greg; we discussed it in New York at Inman Connect.

You stick to the pat line of "integrity being your moral compass". I'll rest easy knowing that you'll dissuade participation in any Web 2.0 discussion that doesn't include you.

You're becoming oh so predictable with your negative attitude.

"I don’t think Joe was discouraging people from participating in *your* conference"

Joe did, Scott. He chose to intentionally ignore that fact, blinded by this petty B.S.

Brian -- I'll ask you what I wondered aloud over on 4realz....

Do you enjoy the possibility of increased traffic because of an outburst from Greg, or do you question your involvement with BHB?

And I would also be interested in your answer to Joe's question of whether Greg Swann made a personal attack in that post...

Brain -

You seem focused on 38 words in Joe's 611 word post.

What are your thoughts on the other 573 words?

I'd also be interested in your answer to the question, "did Greg Swann make a personal attack in that post?"

I don't find personal attacks to be petty bullshit.

With all due respect, Scott, I don't know you either. I hope you'll understand that my only reason for being here is to question why Joe has tried to derail one of of my business ventures; his motive is clear now.

I'll gladly have this discussion with you on the telephone if you still feel my opinion is warranted.

I swear I'm not looking over Scott's shoulder! Basically simultaneous posts.

"What are your thoughts on the other 573 words?"

I don't care.

"I’d also be interested in your answer to the question, “did Greg Swann make a personal attack in that post?”"

See my comment to Scott; the same offer is extended to you.

Question:

Why would anyone be on Greg's blog is he personally attacks anyone.

Example:

Jay, I'm curious to learn your position on this, as I see you are listed on his website as a regular contributor. Being in the Tucson/Phoenix area for quite some time, I've heard you are a really good guy. Why would you want to associate yourself with someone so lacking in respect for others?

Thank you in advance.

ZG

Gee Brian, I spent all that time trying to give you a reasoned response and asked you to answer ONE question and this is all you have to say-- it was my brainchild and venture and don't pick my pocket. Geez Louise. Do you really mean to suggest I had the intent & ability to take down your conference and leave you in the lurch? That's laughable.

Look, you chose to hitch your wagon to Greg Swann & perhaps you don't want to say he did anything wrong -- understandable from an economic standpoint but NOT for a man of integrity, which is how I have always regarded you. You know the old saying, you sleep with dogs, you get fleas. As a man of principle, I would expect you to be more concerned with folks like Marc and not the money you planned to bank with Greg's logo. Please prove me wrong. Tell us ALL what you think of Greg;s use of the words mental midget, little nebbish and slug to describe MD.

Let's try looking beyond the conference. Did Greg's post contain a personal attack? Are you afraid to answer because of what your business partner might think? How it will affect your pay day? Where is your heart on this, Brian-- in your soul or your bank account?

(And for the record, we never discussed the financial aspects of the Unchained conference. BTW, where can I read about Unchained being your brainchild and venture? )

"I hope you’ll understand that my only reason for being here is to question why Joe has tried to derail one of of my business ventures;"

The above makes sense Brian --- and I can understand why you wouldn't be comfortable answering the question online about whether Greg made a personal attack. But no, we don't need to follow up by phone.

I still have to read the rest of this thing after I put my eyes back in my head. Thought I would leave a comment before someone 'breaks the blog'. Jease....its Saturday night guys....get out and hit the club!

This from someone I think every blogger respects. He is not a hater.

http://4realz.net/2008/02/16/bhb/

BTW Brian, as a proponent of Web 2.0 transparency, your failure to answer the basic question upon which this post is based strikes me as starkly opaque. You would call me out for my statement (as is your right) but would refuse to go on record for Greg's remarks. Odd.

Perhaps you would grant me the phone conversation?

Zachary -

Perfectly reasonable question.

As of earlier this evening, I'm not a contributor to Bloodhound Blog. I'm sure Greg will have me off the sidebar as soon as he can get to it.

Jay Thompson, I thought my respect for you could not be any greater but you have demonstrated by your actions that you are indeed a man of true integrity. I am honored to have you a friend and fellow blogger.

And thanks for reading all the 611 words of the post :)

Brian:

I didn't even know it was your conference althrough I did know from reading your post on BHB that you were somehow involved as you mentioned you just got off the phone with someone and asked them what they expected to learn, but no ways, was it clear whose conference it was.

Joe:

I can see Greg not wanting to be a part of any conference. He like myself is an introvert (he admitted to that in a past article). But at the same time, I am not the one to speak out aganist them even when I think they are useless. As an introvert myself, I would be surpised if Greg himself actually responded to this thread either here on on BHB. I know I wouldn't. It's useless. It's kind of like me as a coach, I could care less what people say about me on the sports forums or in the newspaper's message board.

"Perhaps you would grant me the phone conversation?"

Always, Joe. (858) 777-9751

Dustin's recent "enlightenment" is suspiciously timed with his competing offering:

http://4realzed.com/

Brian, I do not know whether you take calls on Sunday. If so, I will call at your convenience. Thanks.
Knowing Dustin, he is beyond guile. I would trust him with anything.

Derek. I think you are right. Introvert? Makes sense for an author :)

Gena, Maureen, Scott, Zachary, Tony, Phil, Todd -- thank you for your comments.

"Dustin’s recent “enlightenment” is suspiciously timed with his competing offering"

Oh come on Brian. Do you really believe that Dustin unsubscribed from Bloodhound to pimp his own training?

IMHO, that's utterly ridiculous. Talk about petty.

Derek:

The conference is "ours". It spawned from an idea I've been hammering for a year (bridge the digital divide) as an instructional alternative to Bloggers Connect. Sort of a "learn from practitioners" with a focus on "hands-on" training.

It hasn't been easy. In 3 short months we've had to develop a curriculum, secure a venue, and solicit sponsorship. 2.5 of those pieces are in place and they couldn't have happened without Greg's unwavering drive. I wanted to throw my hands up thrice, in defeat but, true to the "coach" that he is, Greg withstood criticism and pressed forward.

As I've stated here before, I am a back-slapping, garrulous salesman. I'm prone to be overly-paranoid protection of the brand. While Greg is most likely writing the conference handbook, impervious to the crap, I'm not.

I envy both of you

"IMHO, that’s utterly ridiculous. Talk about petty."

Would you care to talk, Jay?

Call anytime.

Maybe I just spend too much time on political blogs. But I don't get the drama. Greg bashed Mark. Mark zinged him right back.

Jay, I hope you still make it to the Unchained event. If not, maybe we could get a beer while I'm down there.

Isn't it interesting how Google likes to keep up with these conversations. :) This post is now result #11 for in a google search for "greg swann bloodhound blog".

Todd - I have trouble planning or committing to what's happening tomorrow, much less 3 months from now. It's local for me, so not like I have to worry about flights/hotels.

But I can commit to beers! First round is on me. Look forward to meeting you.

Brian -

A post has been germinating. Not sure what I'll do with it.

I'd pay to hear your advice on marketing. I wouldn't pay a cent to hear anything from Greg. There's nothing there for me to learn.

If this is your conference, make it your own. Don't attach it to the hypocrisy that spews forth from the dog's mouth. You're a man of character, as has been said many times so far. Associating with such pure bile is beneath you. The traffic's not worth it; you don't need it.

Maybe the opinions of a handful of us don't mean much. But we're the ones who presumably would have paid to attend your conference. But this doesn't appear to be yours, not the way Greg's hyping it. He's doing you a major, major disservice.

Jay - tremendous decision. I told you as much earlier. There are a couple of others I hope follow your lead and escape the madhouse.

Brian, Go have someone who loves you dearly read this thread. You look different than I think you are. Lar

Brian,

With all that you have invested in this effort, I would think you might be ticked at Swann for creating all of this controversy at this time. Not everyone else. It's one thing to point your finger at Joe, as we know Joe and Swann have been on the outs for quite sometime. But Dustin? Are you Bonkers? Dustin is the most respected professional in the Blogosphere! You will get nowhere fast trying to convince anyone that Dustin is out to get you.

I would go if it was Brian's conference. Since Greg is organizing it, or associated with it, I won't be there.

I'd attend a Brian Brady/Jay Thompson conference anytime. Where do I sign up?

P.S. Joe - you did good for the little guy who lives in fear that the big dog will someday sniff out their blog. I tremble at the thought.

Nothing to fear, Linda ... I've been called out in the past and I've lived to tell about it. "To A Boy and His Dog" if I recall, explaining what superior marketing is used on his listings.

Well thanks Linda. Coming from you that means a lot to me!

I am starting to find humor in all of this.

Today there are two posts on BHB about being nice (including one about social personality/anti-social traits from a scientology site).

Then Dustin Luther somehow gets involved over unsubscribing to BHB and starting his own conference (who cares).

My thoughts: I do think Brian is overreacting a bit but at the same time, I can see where he would get mad if someone bashed a conference yet at the same time I can see where Joe had no clue Brian was the one behind. I think with the follow up, Joe admits pretty clearly he had no idea that Brian was involved and I think that should have ended it.

Dustin Luther: I am not sure why someone would get upset over him starting a conference. At the same time, I don't think it was appropriate of him to announce to the pubic that he had unsubscribed to BHB.

Bloodhound writers: I do not why they feel the need to step in to defend Swann. The blog war does not involve them and by defending Swann they are only making themselves look bad. In my mind they are basically throwing themselves into something that does not concern them and making it appear as if Swann himself is incapable of defending himself.

Jay Thompson: Big surprise he left the Bloodhound. I am pretty sure he and Swann are still friends and all that but with him not taking sides in either argument, he deserves extra Kudos.

Joseph - thanks for making me smile. I think blogs are a great place for a rant. I always enjoy your rants, and your blog too.

Derek, I don't know if you considered my post on BHB as a defense of Greg, but it wasn't. He's a big guy who can defend himself.

I was basically commenting on something I detected that I've seen too often. It's a rough and tumble world and life is too short to sweat the small stuff - I say rather than have a conference, have a boxing match.

I think Greg's attack was a personal attack. I've been guilty of the same thing. It happens. Do I think he should be demonized? No.

That's also not a defense, just an observation.

Joseph, I had to control my laughter at seeing your graphic at the top of this post (very nicely done!) before I could even read the post. It would seem to me that (and I've said this before) Greg Swann is not qualified to be the arbiter of what is right and proper in RE blogs, and his own writing sets a lousy example. Proof of this, to me at least, is the foolish and unwarranted preemptive attack on the RE Weenie—a blog that never would have seen the light of day, but now thrives!

I read your post Mike and agree with it in theory. It's the practical application that is difficult.

Yes, kindness, like political correctness, can be inhibiting. But so can unkindness. If the consensus/policy of a civilized blogosphere, or a single blog regime, is that certain unkindness is not acceptable (eg an attack on a person as opposed their idea), then there ought to be a consequence, no? For without a consequence, what need for the policy?

So, the question becomes what shall be done with the person who crosses whatever line that's been defined? The point of this post addresses this issue and is very narrow ---it is that the BHB demarcation line, defined and applied by Greg Swann, is that personal insult, flame baiting etc. results in banishment. Mind you, I am not talking about my policy, your policy or Jane Realtor's policy. So--

I have submitted the case that Greg Swann's use of terms little nebbish, mental midget, not picked to be on the kick ass team in school, and slug are over the line according to GREG's policy (again, not mine, yours or Jane's). So, I have suggested that this transgression mandates self-exile (since the ducking stool may be too unkind). You can argue that I have not made the case, that no such unkindness has taken place-- that I am stabbing him with kindness-- fine, then your vote is cast nay. You know my vote by the post. The seeming exodus of 3 prominent bloggers from BHB, may suggest my vote is not miscast.

Yes, it's a rough and tumble world and we all can just ignore the unkindnesses or chose to act, according to the degree of our tolerance. But each act by each individual is a singular act of free will in my mind. And I would never suggest to anyone when, or even if, they should act. Each choses for themselves.

In this case, I made my choice to act. You see, Mark, according to my belief, you can give up one unkindness, then a slightly greater one, then another, and before you know it, you're giving away the Sudetenland. Just my long-winded opinion.
(BTW, the reference is to Chamberlain's misguided policy of appeasement "for peace in our time", not to GS)

Boomer- amen

Mike: I admit, with the timing of the article, I did percieve your article along with Russell's as an attempt to defend Greg.

Greg would be a lot better if he would just attack the message rather than the writer. Of course, we all know how hard that is.

Looks like housingpanic has got into the fray. They just LOVE bashing Greg - they do it to unwind :)

http://housingpanic.blogspot.com/2008/02/looks-...

Joseph,

You are right that we all must draw our limits and make stands, however I like to put things in perspective lest I get carried away with my own self-importance as a protector of principles.

In perspective, yes it's best to attack the message not the messenger; however, I understand how in the heat of writing one can go too far. I think you and some others have gone too far in excoriating the excoriator -- it makes be believe your stand on prinicple is more an opportunity to heap on someone you strongly dislike. If a friend of yours had gone too far in criticizing another you might have more understanding.

I don't know the history, nor do I care about the history.

To extrapolate from overlooking moments of "going too far" to a chain of events that lead me to moral bankruptcy is little bit "going too far".

As I have written elsewhere, verbal fighting among writers is nothing new and verbal assaults have always been personal even if dressed up in high style language.

Your stance seems personal, but I understand and don't hold it against you. High visibility players who are controversial are easy targets, but everyone needs to be careful with the piling on becasuse these things have a way of coming back on you -- you or others might be receiving the same treatment one day if you "go too far".

As for the "gotcha" idea of Greg banning himself from Bloodhound, that's one of those things that can't argued -- so, yes, you win that point -- I love those "gotchas". But if it was me, I'd say, yes, I violated my policy and now I'm going to give myself amnesty and a stern warning. We're grownups.

I just don't like melodrama, and I guess, as someone who gets carried away in my writing all the time, I understand how satire and personal attack can sometimes meet.

But to try to clean all writing of biting satire is to dull language and writing to the point of unbearale boredom.

Did Greg go too far? Yes. Have I? Yes. Have you? Yes.

I'll tell you what bothers me much more thsan anything that has crossed satirical lines -- what Dustin wrote: "However, I honestly wish no ill will on anyone involved, and rather than back them further into a defensive corner, I’m going to leave my opinions out of the discussion in order to leave more space for these people to see the error of their ways, apologize profusely, and re-enter our community in a constructive manner."

Now, THAT concerns me.

So, if this is about winning a point wit me, you win. Just be careful and hope you're not next.

Derek,

I can see where it looks that way, but really I'm defending openness and understanding and the right to "go too far" sometimes without being destroyed by the "community".

If I had been the target of a satirical piece that got personal, I'd write a piece in response that scorched the hairs off the other writer's ass, then move along. But that's just how I roll.

Heated verbal exchanges are better than duels or death cage matches -- I mean, we're cvilized here, right?

LOL -- I have to go make some money,

later,

Mike from Savannah

GS's response

http://www.bloodhoundrealty.com/BloodhoundBlog/...

Note: comments blocked

Vanity of vanities; all is vanity...(Ecclesiates)

R.I.P Bloodhound...such a waste.

To Mike Farmer:

My short reply:

You said "You are right that we all must draw our limits and make stands, however I like to put things in perspective.."

OK so let's get down to brass tacks. Do you make a stand on this?
And what is your stand? Do nothing, have a duel of words, box ??
Am I entitled to make my own stand if you choose not to? (And yes, I understand there are risks to every stand we take, even if it is nothing.)

My long reply (for those paying good time to look in)

Let's look at where we agree/disagree: if I misstate your position, let me know

1. the attacks were personal. Agreed
Where we disagree is the response: yours may be a literary scorching, mine is a cartoon and a dose of sarcasm. (though I have no problem with dueling words). So we each roll differently. The point is we ROLL. But if I read your kindness post correctly, it seems to say the better course of action is to just ignore unkindness (heck, we all do it), that otherwise we are supporting mediocrity. As I said, in theory I agree-- but we are talking application--- I see it as a time not to ignore an unkindness, esp one that repeats itself (if only for the sake of pointing out the hypocrisy, as I set out to do). I also believe your "let unkindness go" has its roots in the principle of appeasement. And I am not a fan. Also, if I am unkind, your principle suggests you should ignore me, lest criticism be stifled.

2. As for the ....idea of Greg banning himself from Bloodhound, that’s one of those things that can’t argued.

So, as to the point of the post, agreed. That does it for me. That's all I set out to do. So, we can all pick up our popcorn and go. End of story. (If you, or others want to linger, I'm open to it.)

Where we disagree is what to do about it. You say let it go. I say it's at least worth 1 post. No big deal either way, I'd say.

3. This is between me and Greg. Yes and no.
I call him out and he calls me out. We are both big boys and deal with it. So, you have your boxing match-- and you are free to come by or not. So WE have no problem, in theory. But in practice there's a problem. The difference is (and it's a biggie if you are a principle guy)-- he can call me out, but I am foreclosed to duel with him because I am on the blacklist. So, by necessity, I have to disagree on this blog. Had I been allowed to, this post would have been a comment there. I think that's where it ought to be, but Greg, by virtue of his policy, says do it over at my place. So here we are. I hope you appreciate this point. It is worth the entire comment.

.

I'm relieved that I'm not the only one who found Swann's attack on Joe to be excessively abusive and rude.

Two things can happen now: BHB and Greg will accept this legitimate criticism and change for the better, or denial will rule the day and nothing positive will come of this.

Count on the second choice with GS announcing how great he is.

Joseph,

I don't find anything wrong with what you've done. I thought your post was clever.

All I was saying in my "kindness" post was I detected the stirring of witch-hunters and book burners over Greg's post. I'm just discussing issues and stating my views. I respect everyone's right to statetheir views. I respect everyone's rights, Greg's too. That's my point.

If there were really saints here and they thought what Greg did was very wrong, they'd be praying for his soul. However, thank God, there are no saints here.

Joseph, I'm for openness -- I'm stating a viewpoint, a philosophy. I detected something I can't stand, not from you so much as a general something -- and that something is the attempt to dull language, to take the sting out of satire, to try to develop a fuzzy feel-good world where meanies are destroyed.

That's all, I was jst blaring a warning horn because it all felt wrong. when I see so many people attacking one person for words he wrote, it makes me cautious.

Maybe it's the way i view things -- if someone attacks me with words, I'll just shoot back or ignore them. But our right to speak openly is important to me, very important, and the ability to satirize is important -- you used it in your answer to Greg -- good job. That's all -- I just wanted to be the voice for openness whether I agree or not.

This is not about me being on Greg's team against your team -- That's NOT how I roll. I just speak my mind.

Hell, the way I look at is I get to meet you, we exchanged some ideas and hopefully we're both the better for it.

peace out,

Mike

Thanks for your comment Mike (...thanks Ardell).

First, I have no team. IMO the word "team" in this context is a divisive buzzword. It implies, to me at least, that people are not independent thinkers, that they act solely out of team loyalty. I see individuals, not teams, Mike. I think each person casts their votes/opinions on each issue/event independently, unlike a team member that just pulls the lever for the party. I trust you are not suggesting that Dustin, Joel, Jay, or any other commenter here or elsewhere are expressing their viewpoints from a team perspective. I submit you'd be dead wrong. It reminds me of Greg's favorite divisive buzzword (also adopted by Brian Brady)--- the "mob".

If you researched the propagandists you would notice a tendency to put labels on dissenters, so as to coalesce them into a nameless faceless mass. In that way, one need only use the "group" label to put an individual in a box and deny them their individuality. IMO, your "team" is just the kinder version of "mob". Kinder, but just as Goebbelesque IMO.

Otherwise, I am mostly in agreement with you. I am for an open, free & spirited debate. And I can handle anonymous commenters and expressions of emotion. (You can call me an asshole if you allow me the same courtesy :) I have no trouble with any of it. But here is where you miss the mark completely. In the BHB regime (& I use the word in its negative connotation) the leader of the pack is given the freedom we speak of, while the rest of us are not. Therein lies the hypocrisy.

You can't preach freedom and practice fascism. And therein lies the rub. You will overlook the hypocrisy and carry on while I will not. I will suggest the leader of the pack follow his own rules which he imposes on others-- seems eminently fair to me. Otherwise it is not a dog pound, it is an Animal Farm where "all animals are created equal except some animals are more equal than others."

At what point would the personal insults make a difference to you Mike? Would they ever? And what would you do then? Or will you forever carry on in that regime without any problem. I submit that philosophy would make you appear the team member.

I don't think that Mike knows that Greg blacklists and deletes comments when anyone chooses to argue a point on BHB. You can't have a conversation there or call them out there. That's the joke of the whole "let us teach you about WEB 2.0" thing. AS IF!

And why are you calling Mike Mark?

Oopsie. My apologies Mike.

Thank you Ardell for making that key point. Mike may also be unaware that blacklisted folks cannot comment on his posts, which according to Greg, are the copyrighted works of Mike. You're probably OK with that, right Mike? So not only does he control the conversation on his own posts, he controls them on YOUR posts. How Jim Dandy. Webblogging 101? More like Fascism 101. (Maybe you'll get a nice armband at the conference-- sarcasm--sorry, but it fit)

Ardell nails it (and succinctly, darn it). You can't have a real life conversation there. It's sanitized. As a result, IMO, you can't be taken seriously as a blog or blog teacher. The beauty of RCG is the openness and candor. Conversations are spirited and lively (how could they not be with Ardell) And that's why Dustin, Ardell and all the RCG writers are so well loved and more importantly, respected. They can duke it out. But not in Gregland. The spirited openness you advocate Mike is not on BHB. But I guess you may be OK with that too.

Greg may have used Dustin's group blogging model but it's a mere facade, a brass razoo.

Joe:

About this quote: "You can call me an asshole if you allow me the same courtesy."

How about I go ahead and call you one now and then went my book gets through the publishing process you write a nice blog article calling me one in return followed by a few links to by site and of course my Amazon and Barnes and Nobles page.

Deal :) And I expect an autographed copy :) :)

You're an asshole Joe. ;)

Ya know, that doesn't *even* look/sound right!

You sir are a gentleman, a scholar and just an all around helluva good guy.

Right back at ya Jay ;)

Believe me when I tell you your seniority in the real estate blogging community is not only based on your time out there but an earned reputation for sincerity, honor, in-the-trenches know-how, and, more importantly, a heart as big as Arizona. You are a class act. Your clients are blessed with one heck of a broker and Francy one great hubby. All the best in life to you, my friend.

You misunderstood me, Joe, I wasn't implying you think in terms of team, I was assuring I don't think in terms of teams.

That's all. You don't need to be so defensive with me -- I'm not attacking. You may be reading too much into my comments.

I barely know how Greg runs his site. He asked me to post there and I post there. But what I'm discussing has nothing in particular to do with Greg, so I feel uncomfortable being framed as an apologist for what he does. I don't care how he runs his site. I assume he has his reasons. I will know more as time goes on -- righ now I just post there. I don't know either of you well enough to make any judgements.

But, from my perspective, this is not about BHB, per se -- I'm just discussing issues.

Do I draw a line? Yes, racist remarks are a line I draw, but to attempt to create a moral equivalency between something so serious as racism with satire would be ridiculous.

Are you suggesting I'm somehow in the wrong by still posting at BHB because Greg wrote something that was a personal attack?

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

I draw a line with sexist remarks because I hate that mentality, but I give people the right to be as sexist as they want to be -- I just wouldn't associate with them. Yes, I draw lines and there are mentalities I avoid and never support.

Very interesting. I'd like to offer a general observation that many of our top bloggers because they are very opinionated get dragged into this type of blog war.

At the HomeGain blog we focus only providing real estate marketing and blogging tips. We leave the egos, slights (real and imagined) and insults at the door and focus on the important audience-the real estate professional.

We have featured to date Brian Brady, Mary McKnight, Jay Thompson (Pat kitano is up tomorrow)and another half a dozen or so coming up. We're still waiting for Joseph's post!

I'll be posting an even more controversial post than The case against blogging http://blog.homegain.com/case-against-blogging next week. I expect our top web 2.0 bloggers to refute it soundly....

Think of the HomeGain blog as Switzerland..... a nuetral but profitable forum.

My apologies, Mike, if I misunderstood you or implied something from your "team" statement that you did not intend. But these buzzwords are tossed out there and somehow stick. Please consider my comments to that point PAM :)

I think you've made it clear (& please correct me if I'm wrong), you acknowledge Greg Swann's personal attack but you have no problem with it. You also have no problem that Greg does what he forbids others to do (personal insult, flame baiting, etc). Fine. But...

Do you care if he blacklists, censors comments, makes repeated personal attacks against other bloggers and controls the conversation on your posts? Perhaps you should care where you write and whose brand you are building.

IMO you are writing for a blog where the freedoms of open debate you advocate are absent (just read Ardell's comment). What you chose to do, or not do, will depend on the importance you attach to the issues we've discussed vs. having a place to write. You don't need me to suggest anything. Talk to the other contributors. Look to your own moral compass.

I wish you well Mike and I appreciate your contribution to the conversation.

I knew it- I'm surrounded by Assholes!!



(Spaceballs)

I think you guys should just build a wall around the bloodhound's pen and let them entertain themselves. That way all the butt sniffing won't infect the rest of the world.

Joseph,

This is my last post on this subject. I'll be writing about what I think of all this on my blog. In some ways it's petty, but in other ways I think it's important to discuss -- all these questions of community and codes and guidlines and moral conundrums.

I would call it spoofing rather than a personal attack. I think of a personal attack as accusing someone of being a pervert, a thief, a racist and such, especially with no evidence.

I consier satire and spoofing, while personal and on the edge of impropiety, an historically valid form of communication.

Just think of poor Brittany being spoofed in Spartacus. Poor little girl.

Just think of our poor President being spoofed and ridiculed in lil Bush. Anyone who places themselves in the public is the target of ridicule and satire, even on the net. Otherwise, just hide and be safe.

I just wrote a piece about the piece being spoofed. It was an attack on all agents who are not "rock stars" and who don't wear spandex.

I was offended, personally.

Mike, I have appreciated our discourse. But I want you to leave with these replies:

1. The only community, code or guideline I wrote about was Greg Swann's and how he is apparently above it. Like Napoleon of Animal Farm.

2. You said "I think Greg’s attack was a personal attack".
But now you say: "I would call it spoofing rather than a personal attack". Hmm..

You might want to check with Miriam Webster on the definition of "spoof" which is "to make good-natured fun of" or "light humorous parody" (parody is an imitation). I look forward to reading how you incorporate the words Greg used to support your spoof argument. You do plan to repeat the words when you make your case, right? Methinks you will NOT repeat them unless you like dancing in quicksand :) (smiley face= good naturedness).

Talking in generalities vs. specifics are 2 different things and you seem to prefer the former, I the latter. Are you now saying that specific post was a spoof Mike? Wait... I think I hear something: http://tinyurl.com/2l74wp

3. Your analogy to Britney Spears and President Bush is misplaced, and IMO your advice on the subject of ridicule could get agents, and yourself, in hot water.

Just because you write on the net does NOT automatically make you a public figure. Secondly, I believe the Realtor Code of Ethics (and possibly some licensing boards) frowns upon Greg's so-called spoofing when it comes to other Realtors. It can get you a complaint, and that ain't funny. Go back and read Maureen Francis' comment early on. I think she is absolutely right.

You go ahead Mike and ridicule & spoof some specific Realtors -- I seriously doubt you would, despite your freedom loving spirit. Ask yourself why. (generalities v. specifics again Mike).

I suspect your post will be safe shallow water generalities and you will not venture into the deep ocean where sharks like Greg hang out. (Sorry for the tone on that one but I think personal attacks on specific people do not become funny just because you attach a new semantic label to it.)

I should probably stop picking on this little redneck, but I can't resist. He’s such a champion at leading with his chin and diminutive intellect that I find him hard to resist. His theme throughout this blog? “Avoiding the issue of whether "Stash that cod-piece: I’m not waxed fruit and you are not a rock star" is a personal attack or just a harmless spoof. I wish I were joking. I’m gonna guess that he wasn’t among the first picked on "I married my mama" category. I’ll bet a country fried chicken he wasn’t even in huge demand for the blogging outside-the-lines squad...

Oh, in case you're wondering Mike, this wasn't meant as insult. It's just a spoof. A fun satire. Something harmless we can all joke about around a keg.

Brian
I'm only half-way thru reading these juicy comments...but I need to say that when you associate yourself with someone so closely, like you have with Greg, and Greg writes that doosey, for no other reason than to be mean and create trouble (and created so much negative energy toward your "partner" that the Hoover Dam couldn't hold back),--how could you expect your reputation not to be mitigated in some way?

I was considering going to the UNCHAINED thing. I think he just took it way too far this time.

I just got a Facebook message about Dustin's seminar on March 6th. Maybe you could team up with him?

Jay Thompson
I met you in NYC and now I'm a fan. A man with integrity.

Good for you. And good for Kris Berg too! I'm worried about Teri L., I think she's drinking a little too much kool aid.

That's fine,Petra. I thought it was rather funny. Seriously, anytime you want to spoof me go ahead. I like the press.

How come no one ever gets accused of drinking the flavor aid? -the apparent drink of choice of the Jonestown crew...
http://www.jelsert.com/products_flavoraid.asp

Kevin - you're *just now* a fan?? :)

As for Teri... she's got to do whatever is right for her.

It was a pleasure meeting you in NYC. Going to Inman SF? There's a real estate "bar camp" the day prior that should be good learning (and great fun).

Jay

Jay
I'm like GS, no one else matters.

LOL

Yes Teri needs to do what she needs to do--- but you sorta want to help the girl before she gets her one way ticket to Guyana.

Yes going to Inman SF and was considering a surprise appearance at UNCHAINED.......

Marc Davison is a friend of mine and well I'm old-fashioned when the chips are down.

I guess I'll check out Dustin's event in LA on March 6th.

Petra: "I should probably stop picking on this little redneck, but I can’t resist."

I as a redneck myself, take offense to that comment but I'll let you slide on that one for the time being.

Kevin: You need to email me. My email address is not listed on my site due to legal issues (my agent's advice) but you can get it from Ardell.

Mike: I know you are new and I do not expect you to know a lot about professional writers. I am a former real estate blogger turned novelist. I have a real estate license and all that good stuff. Anyways, you only need to look at Greg's writing to see the attacks. Greg doesn't always come out and attack people but look at the words he uses. Look at the Latin. I can read most of it as I speak parts of three different languages and went through nursing school and eventually majored in history.

The use of Latin and big words (and I do not even know for a fact if Greg is aware of it) is nothing more than a tactic to mock others. I have seen it in several books. You know your reader's are not going to be able to understand it without help and writers will occasionally use those words to (how do I say it)... make themselves and their characters feel superior to to the other characters, etc. In real estate, Greg's audience is other agents. Now, tell me who he is mocking.

Don't get me wrong, Greg is a smart man and one hell of a writer and I admire his writing. The only thing I do not like about his writing is his sugar coating. Words like splendid, etc. To me it's like me going to the kitchen, fixing a pot of coffee and burning my finger. I'm not going to say "Aww Sugar," I'm going to say "Aww Shit!" I almost busted out laughing when he made a comment to one of my comments Sunday talking about all the good intentions he has when he said "from my insides" rather than "in my heart." That my friend is not good writing. And in saying that's not good writing, I'll admit right now, I have my weaknesses as well.

I have no comment on how he censors posts. I know I should have gotten banned a many times in the past, yet I am still there. My biggest complaint against the blog itself is the Odysseus Medal thing. It's biased and he claims to want to promote great writing, but far too many of the nominations are nothing but self promotion materials. You have articles which are basically nothing more than announcements, interviews from people promoting their own sites (why you need a certain type of customized blog), articles where three fourths of the content has been quoted from some other source, and just this week, an article where someone basically did nothing but complain (half of the article was quoted) and say he was going to write to John McCain.

I am not sure if it made the list or not, but take Jay's article (don't take it personal Thompson). The Director of NAR stopped by and left a few comments. Jay followed up on it. There is nothing special about it. Do I think Greg should have linked to it - yes as it's that kind of stuff that his blog is defined for but it should have never made the medal list as it's nothing really special. Again, I do not even know if it was submitted so I am just using that as a recent example.

Same with Lani's Bubble Gum interviews (again Lani - take no offensive, I have already admitted I love them). They are fun, interesting to read, but offer very little other than a good laugh. They have no overall message.

As for your own article about the niceness... It was good but still nothing special. Common sense but I agree we do need reminding of it at times. Of course, my pick Geno won. It was funny, made me think a bit and even question his sanity a bit using a power washer as a snow blower.

Now I may sound harsh about all this writing, but as a writer myself, I have my own weaknesses and I would expect no less from others criticizing my work.

Derek
Greg is just mean spirited and I think everyone in the re.net just is sick of his stoopid ways. Who cares if he's number #11 in google for this or that. I would venture to say that he is very unsuccessful in the real estate industry.

I believe Greg would be a better writer than toiling in the heinous industry of real estate. Oh, did someone say he already tried being a writer?....

Kevin:

No comment on the first paragraph. That's obvious.

Second part: Greg could really succeed with his novel writing (Ramblin' Gambling Willie) stuff. His biggest mistake with his novels is simple: It's not very believable. A little editing here and there and he would be highly successful.

It's kind of like my book (the one about the airplanes). When I first starting writing it, I initially had my character going on a joyride at during an air show. A friend whose father was a retire Air Force officer came right out and said "That would never happen here!"

Thank God for copy editors!

Here’s the trouble with tolerating abusive behavior in a virtual social space: The bad people will drive out the good people....it’s the potential loss of gentle, smart and prosperous people, who, upon encountering abusive virtual thugs, might choose to spend their finite discretionary time elsewhere. -- Greg Swann (yes, I swear)

(thanks to Sweet Lou for the quote)

Kevin: You got an email. I didn't think earlier of clicking your name and going to your site and grabbing your email address from there.

I emailed you from your main site, so check that email (in case you have a different one for your blog).

Thanks for your honesty, Derek. I never submit my stuff. I didn't think it was all that special myself. I just write. I've never thought of publishing anything. However, I write poetry and a magazine in Buffalo, the Buffalo Beat I think, saw one of my poems online and asked if they could publish it. I was amazed. there's something empowering about seeing your work published. I can understand the urge to write a novel and have it published -- that would be something.

"I am not sure if it made the list or not, but take Jay’s article (don’t take it personal Thompson). The Director of NAR stopped by and left a few comments."

Actually it was the CEO of the NAR, but that is beside the point.

No personal offense taken. Was it great writing? Absolutely not. Not even good writing. I do think the fact that the NAR CEO is commenting on a blog that has not been shy about calling out said group is significant. But deserving of a writing award? Not in the least.

I didn't submit it. I've never submitted anything I've written for the Odysseus Medal.

I also make no claims to being a great writer. Good, sometimes. Great? Not a chance.

But not every blog post needs to be good or great writing to be effective.

Mike: When I write novels, I swear the man upstairs is the one doing most of the writing. I write the first two or three paragraphs mainly due to pain (getting dumped, etc) and then after those first two or three paragraphs, it seems like someone else is doing the writing.

As for poem writing, I can't do it! As a history major, I suck at writing history, but I can do biographies. I make mostly A's on my history papers but the only real good history paper I have writen was one I did on the Mi Lai Massacre. (See Wikipedia - most of what is on there was copied from my site).

As a novelist, I tend use a lot of dialogue, and most of my stories center around historical fiction. I am nearly deaf so dialogue works well for me as I am always watching people and putting words in their mouths!

Just to show you how bad I suck at poems, he's an example from 6th or 7th grade.

What I Learned Today:
---------------------------
When my father got mad and hit me "For my own good," He reconciled, And then, realized his plight. Today, I learned to fight.

When my mother was interrupted on the phone, and told me to say. "I'm not at home." Today, I learned to lie.

When telling the tax man what they have maid , forgetting the cash they were paid, Today, I learned to cheat.

While coping a cassette on the radio, to keep away one last debt, I learned to steal.

When my father cursed another race. Oh God, protect what he debase, for now it's too late. Today I learned to hate.

Today, I received my due by praises instead of rue. And now, they have begun their guide. Today I received pride.

When my parents reconciled and paid the IRS all they made, Today I learned from them, that the truth had to be paid.

For the alms we give are not for show, but I must surely know. For charity is worth the price. Today I saw their sacrifice.

Today, my parents clap within a warm embrace their neighbors of another race. The great commandment from above. Today I learned to love.

Someday, I must face alone, this world of fearsome undertone. But today, it blazed a sure pathway. Today I learned to pray.

----------

I told you I sucked!

Jay: Every writer has their niche. None of us are all that good. Heck, I suck at blogging! :-)

The biggest problem with blogging is when bloggers write they blog for dozens of people. They have no clear I.R. (Ideal reader). My best post on my blog was about apartment hunting. The article could have applied to anyone but what made that post stand out above the rest was simple, I wrote it for my ex who was in the process of moving. Jim Cronin and I have talked at length about I.R.'s and how it applies to real estate blogging, so I think he may be working on a piece about that soon.

Thinking my "I.R." is a cash buyer in Paradise Valley. I'd settle for Scottsdale. ;)

Kev,

Just sent you an email. Dustin's in the OC is 3/31 when I will be in town. Can you make that one?

Yes, ARDELL I will see you in the OC end of Marzo (I think that's italian, no?)

Jay:

Maybe, but you have to ask yourself what that's buyer's experience level is as well. Has he or she been involved in real estate transactions in the past? Is it a newly married couple purchasing their first home or what?

You as a blogger have to get down to their level. You have to know what type of questions these people are going to ask. A newly married couple is going to ask a lot more questions than say a first time homeowner who lived in a trailer for 10 or 15 years and are just now at the level where they can afford to buy their own home.

Same with apartment hunting. Someone who has lived in apartment for four years of college is not going to ask as much as say an incoming freshman, etc.

Articles about earnest money, down payments, I think you can get away with not having a clearly defined I.R. but with the more informative "how-to" articles, you really need to tailor your articles to the person it's intended for.

I think one of the things Jim and I talked about was historical homes. Writing blog article on historical homes, you really need to sit down and consider who your likely buyers for this home are going to be.

Same with the articles dealing with real estate law. I could write all day on that topic as I have a passion for real estate law, but if I choose to explain the "pure race state" a good 90% of the people reading it would have not a freaking clue what I am talking about, even through 90% of the readers would be other real estate agents. The reason, not too many states these days are "pure race states."

Just like when you guys in Arizona talk about surveys and stuff, I have no clue what half of you are talking about as here in NC, we still have great big chunks of land carved out dating back to the colonial era.

Vederla in marzo, Kev!

grazie!

Joe, You have to learn Italian to keep up here!

And I thought all the action was over at 4realz. Jeez. I keep hearing how Greg is a great writer. Tell me something, when he is not attacking someone, what else does he write that is memorable? I read his articles and frankly, they bored me. Long, winded and as Derek points out, high and mighty. He was far from the reason I went to the site to read. Kris Berg can write. Jay T can write. And through their writing their smarts came across as well as their kind, good will toward their fellow man.

Ever occur to anyone that the people Greg attacks, Jessica, Teresa, Brad and now Marc, one of the newer and hipper writers I have come across, actually write memorable content? Well at least I think so.

Anyone with several dictionaries and a online latin translator can sound smart. But smart is found in actions not just just words. Anyone, and I mean anyone can weave together smart sentences. But that is not a measure of intelligence. Intelligence is measured by a man's actions. By that standard, Greg has failed his reputation as a wise man.By his actions, he lacks in the basic nuance of smarts. Streetwise, Webwise or any other. He is a fool. A dog that just barks at cars that drive by his window. Bark bark. Sad, jealous dog that wishes he could be a car. Bark, bark.

Bark

Derek - thanks for all the insight on how to blog to different readers. But really, I was kidding. You said bloggers have no clear Ideal Reader. I was joking when I said my IR is a cash buyer in Paradise Valley / Scottsdale.

The average home price in PV is in the $8,000,000 range. The most expensive homes in Phoenix are there.

If I had a cash buyer for PV, to be honest, I could really care less what their experience level is. I'm willing to spend a LOT of time helping them.

To your IR point, it is difficult in real estate blogging to target one specific type of reader. Even if I had a very small niche, say golf course homes from $500 - $700K I couldn't target a specific type of person. There are buyers and sellers, young and old, 1st time home buyers to seasoned investors - and all points in between. I think to be the most effective, a real estate blogger needs to be able to write to multiple audiences. Just as to be most effective, a real estate agent needs to be able to work with multiple types of people.

Ryan - thanks. "Intelligence is measured by a man’s actions." *Very* well said! Woof!

Woof back.

Didn't Kris Berg remove herself from BHB? So Greg awards her the Black Pearl. Mmm. Somehow this just seems so classless. Not that Kris doesn't deserve it. Honestly, does anyone else feel this way but I can't even go to BHB anymore to read anyone. I see his post there at the top and I get a sick feeling, a feeling like he is looking at me and judging me for my worthiness as a reader. I look to the right and see those other writers and it seems as if they have consciously chosen their fate to sink with the ship. Some ship and some captain. Between this site, 4realz, Forem, 1000watt, and a few others, I don't see how I will be missing anything. I'm done.

Derek, that's pretty good for 6th or 7th grade. I started writing poetry in the sixties when Ginsberg and Kerouac were my heroes.

I didn't tell anyone for years, because I was afraid of the possible reactions. Where I grew up there weren't many poetry writers. :)

Joe,

I apologize for "using" your post to say what I need to say this morning. I would post it on BHB in response to Shaw's even more insulting "me too" post. As if no one has a mind of their own and are a bunch of lemmings and this is an isolated incident. Kim told me not to waste my time posting it there, as it would likely never make it to the post on BHB or be deleted, so I'm posting it here. It also ends the "he said she said" of your claim as well. So here it is in his own words:

"Ardell, I killed your comments tonight and
everything emerging therefrom. There is
no flaming, no ad hominem attacks, no
name-calling on BloodhoundBlog. What you
do on your blog is your business. What you
do on RCG is Dustin's. You don't insult
people, not contributors or commenters,
on BHB. I trust I won't have to say this
again.

Greg Swann"

For the record, I laughed when I got that email back in September. The comments went through until I suggested that BHB attacks people for worse reasons than any I can think of...simply to pump up the traffic to the site. As soon as I said that, the entire conversation was deleted. Kind of proved me right, I think. Tearing people apart just to get more traffic, and this week's bragging about highest traffic EVER proves that point all the more, is shameless. I can just see him checking the traffic, and smiling as it goes up, after tearing someone to shreds.

Also for the record, the three strikes you are out for me had nothing to do with the current scenario.

1) The train wreck of watching the insults of his own commenters during the famous war against the Bubble Bloggers.

2) The deletion noted above.

3) The third strike "you're OUT!" The Straw That Broke the Camel's Back, was back in October of 2007 when Kris Berg was named in the Sellsius Top 12 List.

http://blog.sellsiusrealestate.com/top-12-women...

And Greg responded with this post:

http://www.bloodhoundrealty.com/BloodhoundBlog/...

That "dumb blonde video" in response to Kris' recognition here on Sellsius was just too much to bear. I rarely pick up the phone and call someone when blogging. But this one caused Kim and I to call Kris with our condolences and sympathies.

Watch that dumb blonde video, and tell me it wasn't a personal attack of a blonde on the beaches of CA. Like she's "just cute". One of his own writers and he couldn't get up the balls to just say congratulations.

I'm not a "me too" kind of person. I clearly have plenty of my own reasons. Pointing fingers at Dustin Luther and suggesting everyone else is a lemming jumping off the cliff with him, is insulting to say the least, and unfair to Dustin as well.

Apologies for using your post to say my peace here. But it seemed the most appropriate vehicle this morning.

Gawd I love ARDELL. I hope you're going to Connect SF, because I can't wait to meet you.

I have a lot of respect for Russell Shaw. I've met him and he's a nice guy. But I was deeply hurt and offended when he said, "I will never read it again and will get the existing writers there to also leave him."

I didn't leave Bloodhound because of what Dustin said. And Dustin *certainly* didn't "get me to leave". What pure, unadulterated crap.

I don't play Follow the Leader, I am not a lemming. I'm a big boy, and at 47 years of age am perfectly capable of making my own decisions.

Ardell you got it exactly right, Gregg Swann flames to drive traffic pure and simple. His little "awards" are also straight out of the book

What a fraud

Joe, As you know I don't blog very much but I do comment alot when I read good,thought provoking posts.I mean I live and work with one of the best bloggers in the world, so anything I come up with is somewhat redundent. I have tried for many months to read and understand GS and his writings. I just don't get it. To me there is a forcefulness, a meanness bubbling just under the surface.At times he reminds me of the school yard bully that pushes the new kid into his locker and then says "what happened?"You only get away with this crap for so long. I think "the mob" as he calls us is getting way too tired of these self serving diatribes.SEO and placement be damned, write from the heart or don't write at all. We used to have a saying in the music business- " a rumour in his own time, and a legend in his own mind". And so it goes...

Kim
Sing it man!

Well said.

That is a very telling quote Ardell.

It underscores exactly what this post is about-- it is about Greg Swann's hypocrisy, his double standard, his censorship and manipulation of the conversation under the GUISE of a comment policy.

I could throw in pompous egotism, a superiority complex and misogynist (I did get the 'dumb blonde' dig at Kris), but that's a whole another pile of dog poop (better left unpoked). But hey, no one is without flaw. But he does not see HIS flaw of personally attacking folks. He will put you on his virtual verbal torture rack but don't complain or he'll kick you out the door--- he's running a classy joint named Splendor (oh irony of ironies). BHB is under new management & should be renamed Squalor.

And it is always the "mob" or the "morons" or the "evildoers" who are puking on his Splendor dance floor. The use of these negative "group" labels is a classic propaganda technique-- get a negative buzzword label to slap on the dissenters so they become a faceless nameless mass. (Back in the 60s, the label hippie was used in the same way to lump all individuals with long hair who offered a dissenting opinion.) Sadly, Brian Brady has also resorted to the "mob" rhetoric. And now Russell Shaw marches in dogstep. Brian I can understand-- he is a businessman protecting his investment-- I disagree with it, as I have told him, because reputation is worth more than money from a conference. Brian, do not blame the mob when Greg smashes the conference car into a pole because YOU chose the passenger seat. Marketing Mistakes 101. Russell's motives are unclear. And this on the heals of a Be Polite Post. (Rus, I think I see smoke coming from your pants)

But Russell does not make a good case-- actually he makes the case against GS--- but it may win a doggie medal (betcha). Russell choses one word and makes the whole case spin on that one word (which strangely he does not use to describe Marc), which strangely he does not define, which strangely he does not call insulting to the person. He also likens the recent personal attack post to earlier posts written by GS about no licensing for agents, NAR, etc. Hate to break this to you Russell, but those are IDEAS and companies, Marc is a PERSON. Big difference. But thanks Russell for one thing. You said why unsubscribe? I say you're right-- I un-blog rolled him instead. (Note to mobsters & lemmings-- do not follow me off the cliff.)

What Mr. Shaw doesn't address is the entire post. Tell me straight out Russell that you do not sense the demeaning,abusive tone in that post. Please tell me that. And would that language get a commenter banned on BHB? You bet your burning britches it would.

He also ignores the prior history of personal attacks by Greg Swann-- he completely ignores the other straws on the camel's back. And he never addresses the gist of this post--- that the niceness policy enforced upon others, is pissed on by his blog mentor. Hypocrisy 101.

BHB is an Orwellian-like regime (sorta like an Animal Farm, with GS as Napoleon), where the "rules" are whipped out whenever it serves to end a debate Greg is losing or a point he is unable to defend. He simply can't hold up his end of a debate, so he cuts off the microphone. Like the kid who takes his ball if you tell him he stinks.

In New York, where I was born and raised, you had to be able to hold your own in a debate, whether it was in Social Studies 101 or Street Studies 101. Greg Swann cannot hold his own-- he can't duke it out. He can put multisyllabic words together and construct an elaborate word haze but he cannot craft clear logical arguments. Ardell can. Jay can. Kris can. IMO, he resorts to personal invective to make his case (fallacy ad hominem) -- like trying to win a debate by knowing how to curse out your opponent in Latin.

In the end, his traffic may mean nothing other than curiosity, like the craning necks at a car wreck.

Gosh, I thought I could muster a concise retort but, as usual, my lawyer wordiness affliction has gotten the best of me again and I have foisted this burdensome comment upon the dear patient reader. My apologies. Now you know why I use the cartoon.

A great quote. Amen, Kim.

Joe
You and ARDELL have the best responses to this mess, to date.

UN- BLOGROLL, I love it!

Further, I jumped off of my own free will!

A little side note, no response needed:

GS's little mess, I'm sure, has been a bigger boon for this blog than that blog.

Talk about backfiring.

Someone needs to send poor Cheryl Johnson some Kevlar, she's gonna need it to protect herself. She's such a nice woman.

As long as Joe doesn't name her in the next Female Blogger list, she should be OK. CJ's a big girl. She can hold her own, I'm sure.

Joe,

When I learned Latin from the nuns, a really mean one too, they also taught me that it was a "dead language". That was in the late sixties.

Disclaimer. When I went to RCG today I noticed BHB was not in the Blogroll. Or at least not where it used to be. I personally never touch the blogroll, just a disclaimer that it disappeared on its own before Joe's comment above.

Is this just more of the same attacking then cross attacking in which the original post (which seemed to me) to be denouncing? Many of the comments in the post seem to be full of he said she said finger pointing. Though I am unfamiliar with the whole scenario that lead up to this it is clear that the real estate industry will have to come to terms with everything be taken so personal. Bloggers will need to dust themselves and more forward IMO.

It makes the whole industry look like a bunch of kids fighting on the play ground and not the professionals we are supposed to be. Looking at it from a potential client's perspective I would be appalled and aviod a site if the information found was childish banter.

If another blogger is using tactics or strategies we disagree with and/or goes back on standards they even set forth who really cares? Does it affect the way in which I conduct business? No. But even if someone breaks their own rules it still remains that it is their blog and as owner can do what ever they want and it is where my opinion slips into the area of "doesn't mean squat".

Just my take on all this...take care!

You are so right Toby. I would also add that personal attacks on the internet last a long time. It's not like in the playground where we can trade put downs and they waft away in the breeze, lost in a moment. Words writ on the web sting for a much longer time.

Thanks for taking the time to contribute to the discussion.

NP Joseph, "time" is an interesting concept when applied to the blogosphere...it literally could last forever. It would be nice to brush off insults and get back to the fun stuff but that is not the case it seems when applied to blogosphere. Personally I aviod controversy on my site just because I am fearful how potential clients and/or other professional will take the information. It would be bad to have a lash back and be put on a the consumer's black list (not sure if there is such a thing).

"Compromise, hell! That's what has happened to us all down the line -- and that's the very cause of our woes. If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?"

- Jesse Helms (1959)

In reading through this, the only thing surprising to me was learning that the BHB event is half Brian's. GS never alluded to that, and I didn't understand Brian's zeal in promoting it.

I’m prone to be overly-paranoid protection of the brand.

Then don't co-mingle your brand with BHB. The brand is his, not yours, and sooner or later, you will be forced to abandon it to protect the reputation of your own personal brand.

Good point Bob.

All the branding for the event is BHB. I wonder if it was Brian's decision to let Greg take all the credit or if Greg advised it as the better way to market it & Brian went along. Greg never gave credit to Brian for the idea, as far as I can tell (and I looked). Maybe Brian picked that one line from the post to comment on to announce to everyone that indeed it was HIS idea, not Greg's. (He should have done that from day 1 IMO.). The more I think about it, the more that makes sense since the post was not about the conference. Maybe Brian saw his brainchild being dragged through the mud by Greg and he wanted to stop it. This is only my opinion, anyway, and it doesn't matter.

Certainly, BHB has more visibility & traffic than Brian so I guess it made sense to brand it BHB (logo & the name Unchained is a reference to BHB). And Greg's is a stronger (louder?) voice, no doubt.

But, as you say, Brian operates under the BHB brand and his personal brand can't help but be affected by Greg's reputation. (Personally, I was surprised that Brian would not agree that post was a personal attack. Even Russell Shaw, to his credit, admitted it was.)

In any case, IMO it shows poor marketing sense to blast a fellow blogger just before you launch and pitch a marketing conference on how to get business online. Personal attacks have never been shown to attract customers, only repel them. Un-believable.

My gut feeling is that it has become a tougher sell than expected. I don't believe Brian meant what he inferred about Dustin. I think that is frustration talking.

You know Bob, I thought so too until I saw a comment on Dustin's post, by Cathleen Collins, Greg's wife, where she linked to Dustin's conference saying "Uncanny isn't it?". I think the Unchained folks think it was no coincidence. I would hate to think that but you have Brian & Cathleen saying so.

http://4realz.net/2008/02/16/bhb/
(See comment #60)

As Ardell's commented, that suggestion is crazy. Anyone who knows Dustin (& Greg supposedly does) knows he would never in a million years do something like that. Never. Ever.

People say things they don't always mean when they are faced with recognizing a bad investment. I think Brian admitted he had given up on the idea more than once. What he credits GS for as dogged determination, I see as arrogance.

BTW, it's Bob, not Brian.

Sorry Bob. I guess I had Brian on my mind.

Can someone explain to me, how two people (Brian and Greg) can promote a conference on marketing and refer to themselves as the future, when it seems obvious they can't market or for that matter craft a definable brand to their core audience?

Brian Brady claims the idea is his, yet it's branded to Greg Swan. Greg brands the event to a dog, the most ubiquitous and over used mascot in real estate. Few, including Joseph here, seem to have had any clue of Brian ownership of the brand.

The event is titled "Unchained" which regards something completely different than the rock and Roll song used in an unrelated blog post that was chastised by Greg, taking offense to a word that appears as a subtitle written by someone who Greg himself believes is basically unworthy of his time or mention.

I could better understand this if the Unchained event theme song was the very song used in the 1000watt blog but it's not. The Unchained theme song is not Unchained, which would have been a great choice. Instead, it's "I won't back down" which has little to do with the event and more to do with by Greg's own admission, his rally cry for not apologizing for his ineptness when it comes to actually weaving a logical and consistent argument regarding Marc who Greg himself suggests probably had no idea that he even borrowed from Greg's thunder. Well, if he had no idea he was borrowing from Greg then it's pretty clear it was an independent thought which does, on occasion, happen.

Either Greg is delusional or paranoid or his is a master at deflection and potshot sportsman who just has a hardon for Mr. Davison or anyone else for that matter who seems to threaten him.

The cherry on top is Greg's attack an apparently respected writer and branding expert and consultant who basically describes by his rock star metaphor, the very person Greg Swan appears to be considering his legions of fans. If anything, couldn't Marc's article be viewed as one that subliminally or by description pointed a positive light at a guy like Greg and Brian and many of the other Bloodhound people?

Since 1000Watt's reputation seems to be quite professional and Marc's writing often times uplifting and supportive of people like Greg, I offer this as possibility. I wonder now if that's the case, what a horrible tragedy this has all been.

For those of you who know Marc, I would be really curious what you think? I wonder, now having read most of the blogs on 1000watt, that this might very well be the case.

Which brings me back to the question at hand. How good can this conference be vs. how entertaining is it going to be? Has there ever been a conference put on real estate geared towards a specialized topic such as this one that found itself imploding by it's own promoters generous display of social and category ignorance? If not, they score big in the entertainment category and low in the smarts category.

Would it be fair to say that the primary tactic of BHB and the reason why they are popular is their "shock jock" mentality? Low on substance, high on shock. That might explain their traffic because honestly, as someone who is well versed in literature, the writing on Bloodhound may be academically superior but content wise, it's arguably uninteresting and overly arrogant. Great writers appeal to the masses, not to a select few. Greg by far appeals to the masses and it appears now they have lost 3 of their more sensitive and interesting writers.

So is this what real estate industry blogging has come to?

Stumped.

Wow, I am finally speechless.

OK, as long as we're in therapy, much as I love an aromatic roast Swann, I do think that in an effort to detract from Brian's suspicion of Dustin you've written some pretty weird stuff.

"Anyone who knows Dustin knows he'd never, ever..." "the most beloved blogger the world over" (or whatever Ardell said), etc. I appreciate how your rhetorical position led you there, but my experience with Dustin not only supports none of this innocent babe stuff that's being vended, it's arguably been less pleasant than my experience with Greg. Dustin thinks highly of me as well, last time he said anything about it (or the first time he said anything about it, for that matter -- so I give him props for consistency).

I'm not saying that Brian wasn't perhaps a little touchy on this issue, and I'm not saying he's correct on it, but I think in elevating Luther so far above Brian's reproach you risk throwing the Brady out with the bathwater.

Oh man. This is never gonna end...and I love it.

Going to pop a bag of fresh popcorn and crack a fresh mini Diet Coke.

Kevin, I hope others appreciate the beverages and snacks you bring with you to a train wreck as much as I do.

John,

I'm not sure I understand your comment so excuse me if I address what I think it is and try to better explain my thoughts on the subject.

Short version:

Brian says Dustin was out to sabotage Greg's party (or Brian's, whatever). Dustin says no. I say no. Ardell says no. Praise of Dustin sprinkled on top. You say (?) Dustin may not be an innocent babe and maybe he did, could, whatever. You may be right. I and Ardell, and others, may be right. No way to tell unless more evidence is produced or we get a confession from him. So, we each have our opinions of Dustin's motives. Result: Stalemate.

Long version: (you can just skip it and go with the short version)

When I said Dustin would never..ever.. I was referring to posting "unsubscribed" with a link to the post he objected to, as a way to somehow sabotage Unchained. I just don't think he would do it, based on meeting and talking with him--- not out of some highfalutin blogger status I accord him -- but simply as a man. Yes, I respect him and yes, I believe him to be honorable-- he has shown me no reason to suspect otherwise. Hence, my never.. ever statement.

Now, is he capable of such a plot? Theoretically yes, just as it is possible I would turn to cannibalism if my plane crashed in the Andes. So on theory, I cannot argue your point. I can only speak from my experience and belief, and from that I say no-- he was objecting to the post (& possibly reaching the end of his tolerance of Greg). But if I implied that I KNEW absolutely he would never do it, that would be untrue. Now if your experience leads you to believe as Brian does, how can I argue with that.

As for elevating Dustin above Brian, I don't understand the criteria. In character, in honesty, in marketing savvy? Sorry, but I missed that point. But I did enjoy the Brian and the bathwater line. You are one clever son-of-a-gun John.

Can't we all go home now?

Here's my theory on this whole ordeal. It all stems from a sincere difference in marketing opinion. Marc believes Realtors should stop marketing themselves with their dog. Greg obviously believes the opposite. In turn, he waits for some excuse to rip on Marc's opinion to show the world how much smarter he is to use his dog in all his marketing and how "stoopid" Marc is for his marketing advice. Greg is simply protecting his dog Odysseus. If you look at it that way, Greg doesn't seem like such a bad guy. He's just fiercely protective of his dog and his marketing strategy.

Deep down I bet that's the root of all this hostility. I know Marc (or anyone else) doesn't deserve to be treated that way.

Also, remind me never to go on a trip over the Andes with Joe.

Next on "Fox Realty", World's Wildest Realtor Videos--Best Of The Worst Blogger Crashes.

Should the two events make much of a difference? There is enough people out there to fill them both. But the problem is this: They both seem to be shallow in their marketing of their events by marketing it to the same people.

The way I see it is like this, if Joe wanted to come to Charlotte (2.5 to 3 hours away) and give a conference while I had a similar one planned in Greenville, that's fine. I could find enough people here to fill my conference while Joe could easily do the same in Charlotte, but no, unlike Brian and Dustin, their targeted audience are the same people.

What really needs to be done if everyone is going to start doing conferences is simple, they need to do like the baseball coaches have done and get together and figure out the dates they are planning to have camp at their schools and try to come up with a solution so that kids wanting to go to one camp can go to such and such's camp one week and then to another the following week. No money is lost, everyone benefits and the kids gets to learn from a broad field of coaches.

And yes, we do compete for the same campers. Camps are what keeps our teams running and in a sense, a big part of it is what pays most of the coach's salaries. But we have found a way to work together and we support each other's camps.

We may not agree with each other's coaching theories (hell I disagree with a good majority of the hitting theories) but we still support each other's camps and stuff. It gives the kids a chance to kind of form their own opinions and find what works best for them.

I'm really late to the game as far as commenting, but have been reading along since all this started...I've got 3 points:

1) When Dustin, then Joel...two people Greg (and many other people) admittedly admires, proclaimed Shenanigans against Greg...the floodgates opened.

2) The game changed when money entered the equation.

It's one thing to exchange barbs in virtual social settings and on blog sites in relation to each others philosophies, but completely different when each parties potential livelihood (the almighty dollar) is called into question.

3) When you play with fire, you're gonna get burned sooner or later.

Incredible Agent,

If you are right to any degree, then Greg is a bigger fool than he has appeared. If you are telling me that this entire thing is about a grown man using a public forum to call someone out, to risk his reputation, his conference, his blog, his business, his friends to protect a dog whose most advanced daily thought is locating his testicles for a good lickin', then what does this say about Mr. Swan?

Why then, in your opinion does this make Greg not such a bad guy? Let me see if I understand what you wrote - you are saying that a grown man who has a difference of opinion with another about something as shallow as a dog, and takes that disagreement so far that aside from going public with it to refutes someone's opinion, he in turn use's fiercely derogatory language to destroy a man's reputation makes him not a bad guy because he's defender his dogs honor?

If I have taken a liberty here, I apologize, but if this is what you said, I am greatly troubled by that. What Greg did seemed deliberate, hateful, spiteful and for a Realtor sworn to uphold ethics, to do it in the public eye, seems just a tad unconscionable.

But to Joseph's original point, it goes against Greg's published ethos. But in any event, what you are saying is using spiteful, damaging language against another person is ok it's in defense of a pet.

Have we lost our minds?

Ryan: I could be wrong, but from the way I read I.A.'s post, the dog is like Greg's trademark. It's not the dog itself but his brand of marketing.

Jeff: Money is the root of all evil!

Someone send with a decent sized pocket needs to send Joe and Dustin a great big dog bone as a joke. They seem to have picked Greg's bone!

Perhpas. I don't profess to fully understand trademarking and branding but I can agree with the notion that Greg would and should be defensive or protective of his trademark but only in the sense that he were defending it against someone stealing it. But that doesn't appear to be the case at all. Regardless, it seems shallow to sanction Greg's verbal attacks or downgrade him to "not such a bad guy" because he is defending an opposing opinion about the validity of using dogs as a trademark. If that's the case, there are 14 people in my office that I hope Greg never finds out about.

Come on people! How can anyone take seriously the rantings of someone who would advocate this fantasy about the subprime market.

http://activerain.com/blogsview/170717/How-Big-...

Even I, your intrepid consumer, knew enough last August to convince my spouse not to invest in mortgages.

Alice

P.S. I am delighted to see that my comments do not get "moderated" over here before they are posted.

Yes,Toby. There is a backlash.

Alice

Jay,

I might be called one example of the IR (ideal reader). I am a cash buyer going to Tucson next month to look at property. When I chose my realtor, I did consider his/her web presence, which helped establish that he/she was forward-looking yet dignified and professional. That's the kind of agent most consumers are looking for, not the flame-throwing blogger with the tremendous ego and questionable ethics or the endless debater of silly issues irrelevant to my home search.

Sincerely,

Alice

Alice- a consumer

Sometimes comments go into moderation before posting, or are eaten, by virtue of our spam filter program (Spam Karma2) but we don't censor or blacklist here in appreciation of every reader's right to voice their opinion, even if contrary to mine or others. This is America after all.
Thank you for your opinion.

@Ryan: I left that comment in jest. I really don't believe it has anything to do with his dog. Believe me, I have not lost my mind or downgraded/defended his words. Just bringing a random observation to the table regarding the differences in marketing opinion between Marc and GS.

However, seeing as dogs are man's best friend. It is honorable to defend your dog/friend when it is attacked. I don't believe Greg was being honorable in the least with his words, as this had nothing to do with his dog. He just had a momentary lapse in judgment.(which seems to occur often)

Attack the idea, not the person or the people. GS doesn't seem to get that.

This is an example how Greg Swann runs his blog. He challenges me in this post, and says others, like Ardell, are being manipulated by me, which is an insult to them. Now, you would think I could go over and comment in my own defense. I cannot because I am on the blacklist. I don't know if you want to call that censorship, but where I come from it's simply "dirty pool."

http://www.bloodhoundrealty.com/BloodhoundBlog/...

Joe,

I just called you asshole over on BHB. Didn't want you to hear it 2nd hand.

I saw it, Ardell. As you know, I am unable to address the post, or your comment, there. So I am at a bit of a disadvantage. It serves no purpose to do it here.

You invited the option to call you an asshole, over here.

I thought I'd test to see if I could flame someone over at BHB, as long as the flamed person was disliked there.

Clearly what I said about you was "worse" in the wording and strength of it, than what I may have said to Brian Brady that was deleted. So it was a good test. And since you saw it, apparently flaming is OK at BHB, as long as the flamed party is on their shit list.

So that explains ALL of it, doesn't it? BHB flaming someone Dustin admires and respects, was over the top for Dustin in the same way that my "flaming" Brian, was over the top for Greg...but not my flaming you.

So it is not about flaming at all. It is about WHO is being flamed and whose friends are being flamed. Back to high school...no?

Ardell, that was VERY clever. Yes, indeed.

Now, will I read in another comment there how you tested the comment policy and exposed its unequal application?

Wow, you would make a great lawyer Ardell :)

"Wow, you would make a great lawyer Ardell"

Clearly not the first time I've heard that :)

No. I only commented on BHB because Greg misquoted me in the text of that post. I never said I was banned from commenting on BHB as he intimated was my claim. I had to correct that.

I have no interest in commenting there on a regular basis other than to defend myself. I have little interest in commenting on Greg's posts, but reserve the right to comment on the few good bloggers there that I continue to admire.

Derek nailed it for you. Even moreso if his next comment makes it out of moderation.

I posted in Dustin's defense as their accusations are ludicrous, as my comment will point out as to why, and how I am positive of that.

If allowed to see the comments, readers will see Greg lacks the ability to defend his position.

If allowed to see the comments, readers will see Greg lacks the ability to defend his hypocrisy.

Perhaps if everyone were nicer to Greg, he would begin to feel less threatened and bully people less. Yes, maybe it would only be one person who wouldn't get bullied if we all tried hard to be nice to him, but then maybe that person by not getting bullied would be nicer to his wife that day or whatever. And even if Greg still bullied ten people, it would make a difference to the one person he didn't bully.

Or maybe instead of being mean to Greg next time he bullies someone, we could all call up each other to let them know, then call up the victim and try to cheer him up by letting him know Greg sometimes gets like that and try to make him feel better. So then the person bullied would feel better and Greg would be less likely to bully other people since he'd know it was ineffective as a publicity measure.

Maybe Joe, since you read Greg a lot you could call me. Maybe Jay would go for it, too, but I certainly wouldn't speak for him. Maybe Teresa -- she knows how it feels to be on the receiving end, so maybe she'd want to do it, too. We could all call up the victim and cheer him up with kindness and good fellowship.

John,

I still can't imagine Dustin being nasty to anyone. Can you give us a clue on that one? Maybe we can explain it away...or call you and make you feel better about it :)

Ardell, aren't you guys pretty tight? Why don't you ask him and he can tell you what he thinks about me, and if you disagree maybe you can say a kind word about me or tell him something like "I know, John can be pretty trying at times, but maybe you hurt his feelings." So then he'll feel better about me, and then I won't be so scared, and I'll be better able to convince Joe to help Greg.

I appreciate the help.

Oh, and by the way, Joe, so you'll be able to call me, my direct dial number is (530) 672-9160.

My book is getting further and further behind with all this arguing. I should have known not to get back into reading real estate blogs. You guys best better buy my book when it comes out for wasting all my precious time.

I'm actually trying to work on stopping the arguing, Derek. Maybe another benefit of that is that you will have more time for your book.

Did you know your web site currently points to a blank Apache directory, by the way? I clicked through because I was interested in what your book might be about.

Yeah, I screwed it up this afternoon. I don't really like the theme I was using and I am not really sure what direction I want to go in with the site so, I've put fixing it on hold for the time being.

The direction the site takes will ultimately depend on the publisher anyways, so I am not really worried about getting it back up at the moment.

The book is about a girl growing up in the Great Depression who joins the Army as a WASP. The story begins with Elizabeth whose father is a U.S. Senator, falling in love with the son of an aircraft mechanic. They begin dating and the father grows weary of the young man, gets him an appointment to West Point, etc. The "love letters" soon stop arriving in the mail (father hides them), Elizabeth grows up, get married, divorced and so on until the truth finally comes out about the letters and why Elizabeth's father (now dead) was highly against his daughter dating the guy.

I will not give the ending away, but the father had dated the young man's mom in the past so... form your own conculsions!

Sounds interesting. Good luck with it.

Where is Greg's comment policy? It used to be a tab. Did he remove it?
I want to see how it is OK to insult and abuse others but not Greg or the contributors. Hmm...

John,

I love your sincerity and I would never have guessed from our previous exchanges that you are who you now appear to be. The whole idea is for us to get to know each other on the blog, not off the blog. The same way our clients will get to know us on the blog and not off the blog, before calling us.

I'm "tight" with Dustin in the on blog and meet at events way, same as I would know you if you would spill your guts on the page like East Coast people do :) Keep your phone number in your pocket. Use the blog. That's what WEB 2.0 MEANS!

Joe,

Still focused on Greg, are you? What's YOUR (personal) policy on kindness to others? It's not right for Greg to constantly flame others, but it's ok for one blogger to repeatedly go after another, time after time after time, when it's you going after Greg?

If kindness and respect for others is the standard you're holding Greg to, it's fair to ask if you're willing to live up to it yourself? Or is Greg the only one who has to live up to his ideals, and you get a free pass?

To ask again, are you interested in finding a solution to this that's kind to all concerned, or is the traffic and attention too tasty to give up? I think you're a good man and you will accept my solution or propose an alternative.

If on the other hand as Erion suggested the real heart of the matter is eyeball lust, then perhaps Jay's "just say no" to participating in such threads is better than proposing a positive alternative.

Looks like I have my answer, don't I?

Enjoy your traffic.

Dear Realtors and other friends,

Now I am convinced that the real estate blogoshere's mission has nothing to do with selling real estate. Its apparent purpose is social networking (often of the negative kind). Here you have a real-live consumer trying to engage with you, and the debate continues to focus on your blog-o-versy rather than on the people whose business you rely upon to survive. Except for a few kind words from Joe, I have been completely ignored. Not a single one of you has reacted to my comment regarding what consumers want from a realtor and how a realtor's web presence can turn consumers on or off (unless I missed a post).

Of course, it is your game and I am just a guest. I first got into watching it all when I accidentally happened onto ActiveRain's Project Blogger. It's better than the soaps!! (But not better than "The Wire".

Thanks for the entertainment!

Alice

Alice - I missed your comments. So sorry! (Too much info and drama lately ;) )

While social networking is a part of real estate blogging, it *is* (or should be) really about the consumer.

In case anyone else missed one of Alice's comments, here is a real gem. Read and heed:

I might be called one example of the IR (ideal reader). I am a cash buyer going to Tucson next month to look at property. When I chose my realtor, I did consider his/her web presence, which helped establish that he/she was forward-looking yet dignified and professional. That’s the kind of agent most consumers are looking for, not the flame-throwing blogger with the tremendous ego and questionable ethics or the endless debater of silly issues irrelevant to my home search.

I would love to see the site of the Tucson agent you chose. If you don't want to leave it in public, you can email me at jay@thompsonsrealty.com (If you'd rather not, perfectly understandable).

And you're welcome to visit http://www.PhoenixRealEstateGuy.com any time!

John,

I answered you on the other thread. Sorry.

Hi Alice,

Good luck with Tucson. There are a couple of really first rate bloggres / Realtors out there who wouldn't be caught dead in a silly thread like this on a bet. I'm sure you'll hook up with someone good.

Please, Joe. You answered me like Brian answered you about whether the original post was a personal attack.

Anyway, no matter. Some good finally came of it.

Have fun.

John,

You're right. This is not a marketing or real estate thread and for those looking for one, it is a grand waste of time. That is why I labeled it a Rant at the beginning-- so readers know. Folks are therefore, free to choose--- ignore it, read it, participate-- it's up to the visitor to decide. Besides, I tried using force to get folks to read and comment but it didn't work-- just a joke.
For those who CHOSE to participate, like yourself, I would think you chose freely and I thank you for taking your valuable time.

Hi Jay. Thanks for noticing. I went to your blog/website and liked what I saw. A good balance of info and (positive) social stuff. I'll certainly check in from time-to-time to learn about Phoenix. I'm not sure about sharing the website of my realtor without checking in with him/her. I wouldn't want to drag him/her into some kind of imbroglio. It's not that I don't trust you, it's just that internet tentacles can sometimes reach out in ways one can't anticipate.

Hi John. I remember you from ActiveRain. Pithy and clever. Don't dig yourself too deep into this one.

Hi Joe. Thanks for letting me be a guest on your blog.

Sincerely,

Alice

My pleasure, Alice. Thanks for visiting. Next time I'll clean up the place :)