WARNING: Rant ahead. No one under 18 admitted without parent or guardian. Read at your own risk.
I would much rather find my name on a blacklist than be thought to be among or even in support of the blacklisters. (Greg Swann , Do You Want Cheez Whiz with that weenie?)
Aside from the supreme irony of that statement, Greg, methinks it is about time you add your own name to the BHB blacklist and ban yourself. You are charged under your own comment bylaws (excerpted below) with first degree flame-baiting, bad behavior and insult — all banishable offenses in your desert blogdom. You are a repeat offender, sir.
….. flaming or flame-baiting….. we are very strict about bad behavior. If you get the notion that your fear or anger or rock-ribbed moral fire accords you the right to abuse or insult or brow-beat ….. you will be ejected with dispatch.
In The Land of Mental Midgets, The Moron is King
Ad hominem homilist Greg Swann has once again sunk his teeth into the cod piece of a fellow blogger over a post he took exception to.
While I will write to the death in support of Mr. Swann’s right to disagree in the harshest of terms– including his right to wage wordy blog wars, call real estate bloggers mental midget nebbishes, panderers, and evil— I believe a man ought to stand by his own standards. And under his own rules of commentary, he has crossed his line again and ought to be self-exiled from his own blog (perhaps to rustle up some real estate business for the household coffers— which by his own admission, he does not even attempt to do with BHB).
Despite his disingenuous posturing as a free speech advocate:
The fact is that I had all kinds of power in reserve — deleting comments, banning particular commenters, cutting off comments — that I did not and would never use. (G. Swann, Foghorn Leghorn Strikes out…what if they gave a war and …. nothing happened?)
…Greg Swann is a censor and a blacklister. (Based on the quotes above, he is also accomplished at the backflip.)
Sentenced to the Ducking Stool and Banished to Bogeyland*
Greg Swann’s most recent ad hominem homily is directed to the writer of this post at 1000 Watt Consulting Blog, who used a rock video/song to make the analogy of rock stars to real estate success. This rather modest assertion (as opposed to say….abolishing real estate broker licensing to protect consumers) got this fellow a swift kick in the cod piece. (That’s gotta tingle.) But it’s nothing new.
The list of victims of Greg Swann’s verbal attacks over his short (in dog years) blog life reads like a real estate bloggers Who’s Who. From Cheez Whizzer (defunct) to Bridge Burning Dancer (how to make paragraphs) to Chaffed Bubble Warmonger (how to dissect a masturbator) to Weeniegate (how to wage a preemptive blog war against a blog with no content) to Anti-Conference Chain Smoker (how to insult your host’s event (on his own blog, no less), an event you never attended) to Retard Good Sheparding (how dare you steal from Dylan, you panderer), this is one helluva repeat offender. (In Texas, he’d get life without parole.) Unchained, indeed.
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.
Heck, how many times does a dog have to pee on a carpet before he gets a ticket to the doghouse? Geez, that smell lingers…. and we all have to put up with the stench.
End of rant.
*also the penalty for pignapping in March of the Wooden Soldiers.
Related Rants:
How to Tell the Difference between an Idiot and a Moron
Real Estate Licensing is no Laughing Matter
Mad Dog Pees on Inman Connect for not Getting Keynote Spot
Technorati Tags: blogs, blogging, real estate blogger, free speech, humor
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-like-his-fellow-realtors-have.html#links
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/?p=2611
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).