UPDATED for clarity: My own POV, without giving credence to the blog terrorism, emotion, lack of ’informed judgement’, or even from absence of malice.

Brent Peters  February 25 2009 10:45:34 AM

So I actually hate to even use the word "terrorism" at all, but there is an analogy here. When I apply my Greco-Roman logic and reduce the very notion of terrorism to it's most simplest and fundamental purpose, it seems to me it is largely to "cause an establishment to overreact". You can agree or disagree, but the subject (POV -Point of view), means that it is certainly mine. That taking the concept of inciting a group or an establishment to "overreact" to statements made, could be IMO, a sort of blog-terrorism. To be absolutely clear, Not "terrorism" for the sake of "terror", but the shear concept of trying to incite an overreaction.
So some write things in a way to cause overreaction. Step 2 in logic would say, what is this persons fundamental purpose in using this method (blog-terrorism (not even sure it is a term)), that persons purpose is mainly to create overreaction. A lot of times they do this to bring more ATTENTION to themselves through the overreaction. Now what is funny, you now must ask your self, what is my very own "fundamental purpose" in writing this now?
could be
A. my own sort of terrorism, trying to stimulate this overreaction in others. Anyone that knows me, knows that I like being in the background. Observing. Playing the puppet master. More importantly, I am a good judge of timing. So why do I write more down now than 4 years ago?  
B. Emotion - the older I am getting the far fewer things I find worth dying for, so my gut check says, it isn't this. At least not emotion that is stirred by Terrorism, Ignorance (meant respectfully as 'lack of judgement').
C. Truth - accuracy of it. Integrity. Character. The fundamental that I personally believe in.

Emotion / "lack of informed judgement" / absence of malice /  ---- I will group these together with  the exception of separating out for a moment "Emotion". Everyone that knows me knows I love to read. I love history. I love philosophy. I LOVE the fact that I can read a greek or a roman, and find that some of the very basic forms of Human Behavior and thought haven't changed at all. IMO, our environment (technology (MEDIA), medicine (biohealth and psychiatric...) mostly changes our own views or perceptions of ourselvesow when doing this. basis and our behavior, e.g. we can self-project/impose at a phenomenal rate of change. Emotion without judgement can lead to incorrect perceptions.
Now when basing non-judgmental/emotional views, this is a form of a class logic called a "fallacy".


I read some blogs and they have improper objectional balance in 3 particular ways.  
1. Knows  He/She is a blog-terrorist. She/He won't like the label that I have asserted. She/He will write a response to what I have asserted. She/He will look at the "Save and Post" button, and then say "I will wait and see how I feel tomorrow.". Depending on how THEIR next 24 hours goes, (behavior), will largely depend on what She/He does next in reaction to this post. I respect THEM, will have a beer any time, will share thoughts, ideas, innovation, customers, technology, family, and culture. We know each other. They know that I know who I am speaking to.
2. One person - They didn't view things quite in this way before, what I just wrote, but now will gut check their "fundamental purpose". Don't know this person well enough to know the response or the longer term outcome. What I do know, is I love watching.
3. One person - truly had the the right Ethos, Pathos, but a complete absence of Logos. I will go on about this. and will have no problems with what I just wrote.

Now, in it of itself, I nor anyone can separate out Character/Integrity from any/each of the 3. I have my views, BUT, don't have the logos to accurately WANT to pass judgement.

Now, my notion about Ethos, Pathos, and Logos is obviously about (Ethics, Passion, and Logic). So if I discount that some of the views are without proper intent, ethics, ... overreaction, ... then caution must be observed when BELIEVING and ACCEPTING this view. Emotion and Ethics, blog-terrorism, ... in my view can have a correlation.

Logos - Some of the views read. Was truly out of Ethics, the right Passion to an extent (In some cases over zealous to the clouding of Logic), but had an issue with Logos.
In this way, people will make statements that are what we call "Deductive Fallacies".    (Hasty Generalization, Appeal to probability (think Murphy's Law (yes, a fallacy, modify slightly and it becomes a 'truth')). Now what I love even more is when people believe data from this unobjective/balanced view, and toss out logic/reasoning ("this person is my friend, it MUST be true!!!"). Now you have replication of bad data.
Now some people quote other "anonymously", but sometimes I can test these statements, a series of questions, in order to triangulate the original sources.


Now comes some of the truth. There are some things that are just flat out against the LAW. Human Resources, Insider trading, ... when some people write some of the things that they do, I seriously have to question their judgement. They are good people, but what planet do they live on? Why would I betray a trust that I wish to uphold on behalf of employess, customers, partners, ...  Would you really trust a person like this? Would you trust a boss like this? Would you want to work for him? Would you trust a Partner that betrayed the law and the confidence of people? If you would, you are are better person than me.

There are also fallacies made about some situations. An example about 12 years ago, I worked on a project. This person had all of the visibility. He talked good. But me and my friends would laugh and say "this person couldn't code his way out of a while loop". Everyone thought he was the golden child, because his main Ethos/Pathos was all about how good he was, but there was no substance to back it up. Conversely. If a product is a GREAT product, e.g. I like my iPod (love it),  the Logos of a winner can be there, but without the ability to have Ethos/Pathos to push it to the market WELL, most any other company, besides Apple, would have failed with it. Same positive example for people. Someone can be great and brilliant, produce better than anyone, but if this person doesn't have a good manager, one that "watches out" for the stars and accuracy of how to measure things, then people can be overlooked. I consider myself a good manager, I try to watch out for people, (just My POV). As a mentor, I tell people "deliver good, then as Mozart told Salieri in Amadeus 'you need to let people know you finished.' ".

Now, I love people. I love being a manager. I love motivating, sometimes through encouragement, sometimes through regimented discipline, sometimes through out right tough love. I get my kicks off of people improving and feeling better about their accomplishments. All people are different, they respond to different rewards, and respond to different induced motivation. I never like giving up on people. Have we ever lost some good people? yes. Do I feel like defying the legal system, corporate policy, personal ethics, trust integrity, an INDIVIDUALS personal privacy, because blog-terrorists, or ill-informed people think that they have the right to know this privileged information? NO!!  

A lot of people here today, and that have left over the past years. We have all worked our butts off. The economy is in the crapper, no fault of IBM, Lotus, or anyone that has left the company or still here. The economy WILL heal. With the right focus, leadership, FOCUS, and FOCUS, we can actually get things back on track IN THE ECONOMY as a whole. For Lotus/IBM, I like our future. I think we have a great opportunity in front of us. We are standing at the doorway with great products. GREAT! We can offer the ability to save customers money, with many of the new products, THIS SELLS! We have a great team. My number one job as a manager, is to know my tools, (People, Processes, Info), and I think myself and all of the people in IBM have this down.
So again, I think our outlook is actually very good. I love Lotus, IBM, and the teams. I love the community. Focus, please criticize me (us), through focusing on what is needed constructively in the products, and not operationally. You don't know the extent of driving out cost savings in the processes to help on Notes 8, Domino 8.5, ... I am a fanatic for details. We ring out ever cent that we can. We have great products. We have a good roadmap ahead. I am actually VERY enthusiastic, on things you know about, and those things not yet told. Over time, you will be as well. Do you really not think WE (me), have been churning and preparing for this night and day, and don't have a good solution? Sorry to surprise the b-terrorist, but I do.

Notes 7, 3 years 115 features.
Notes 8, 2(small crew started 6 months earlier) years, really 1.5 years for the whole team. 1452 Features.   We built the bottom floors of the house (Expeditor), and the top floors (Notes), in parallel. I (we) asked for advice on what to focus on, you didn't give me or the rest of us the FREE advice on which resources to use to pull of this amazing feat. Where were you then? Me and some of my staff took a few black eyes internally on some approaches that you never see, so we know best how to manuever in this wonderful corporation. Alot of terrorist were writing then, a lot of Logos absent posts, ... I must say, with the results that I read now (ZDNET todays post), and customer feedback, ...  I will take this feeling any day, and not be too upset with the scorn on approach or tactics. Results matters.  

When someone says that "X,Y,Z team is hurting.", "Things are bad because this person is gone, ...", Logos is completely absent. Fallacy sets in. FOCUS!   These people are looking through the prism, often from other peoples ill-perceived views. Not offering any concrete data, and passing it off as FACT. My POV, you can believe if you like, but I know differently. They don't have the FIRST clue on what the staffing is, and remember some of those quoted started with a fallacy view anyway. What I want to know from you the community is the products. The products that we currently offered now, the ones that we give you in DP programs, the feedback. What you want to see, what you need, ...?   More importantly wrt Lotus and you (the community) that I love is the comradery. I LOVE IT! But, Again, this is a business. We will continue the comradery. We will continue the close relations. We will NEVER be asking you advice on how to do resource planning, operational management, budgets, build efficiencies, ... . Don't get your feelings hurt, but I am honestly surprised that you would even consider that. When I joined Lotus exactly 4 years ago this month. I was handed Notes 7, and Workplace WMC. Step one was building a new client strategy, step 2 was building it. I would prefer that you judge us (ME) on the results of our products, GOOD(mostly what I get today) or BAD(almost purely what I got 4 years ago), and not judge us (me), on the way that achieve that. I have worked too hard in my career, I know what I am doing, and I work hard at running things MY way, good or bad. I haven't reach the point where I want to run things OPERATIONALLY by an external body. More importantly, I have trust, confidence, in the people, management, developers, ... running this group.


I hope that I truly offend no one. Resource Actions are painful. At time when my mom died (sorry to throw that in), but true, a rough holiday period for me personally. I will respect all parties concerned. I wanted to get your help in focusing on the products again, the problems at hand, ...  I know what I can legally speak on, and know what I cannot. Dirty Harry (Magnum Force) "A man has to know his limitations.". I merely wanted to give a truthful thought here. Concern for people, and most importantly, "focus and move on". I want to be a part of this community to, and contribute.

Your ally,
Brent

• Comments [7]