chrisbrogan.com - Latest Comments in Quid Pro No

Re: Quid Pro No

Dataway Simo — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 15:23:43 -0000

موقع
العاب
العاب طبخ
العاب بنات
العاب سيارات
العاب باربي
العاب للبنات فقط
العاب تلبيس
العاب تلبيس بنات
العاب بنات فقط
العاب قص الشعر
العاب اطفال
العاب بنات جديدة
العاب البنات
العاب قص شعر
العاب ترتيب
تلبيس بنات
العاب الطبخ
العاب السيارات
العاب مغامرات
العاب اكشن
العاب ذكاء
العاب مسدسات
العاب تصويب
العاب سباق
باربي
مركز تحميل
العاب جديدة
العاب 2010
العاب سونيك
العاب ميك اب
العاب طرزان
العاب مكياج
العاب براتز
العاب ديزني
العاب دراجات
العاب دبابات
العاب فلاش
دردشه
العاب بنات قص شعر
العاب هانا مونتانا
العاب طبخ للبنات فقط
العاب قص شعر للبنات فقط
hguhf العاب
hguhf 'fo
hguhf fkhj
hguhf sdhvhj
hguhf
مسجات
توبيكات
صور
تفحيط
فيديو
منتديات
القران الكريم
محمد
اناشيد
الاسلامي
خطب
محاضرات
ادعيه
اناشيد طيور الجنة
طيور الجنة
صلاة التراويح
العام
النقاش الجاد
منوعات
الاصدقاء
التوظيف
الطب
الصحه
الشعر
خواطر
قصص
الشعر الصوتي
طبخ
موضه
المراة
الطفل
ديكور
العروس
ازياء
مكياج
منتديات العاب
نكت
الرياضه
برامج
الماسنجر
العاب
العاب سيارات
العاب بنات
العاب طبخ
العاب ذكاء
العاب اطفال
العاب اكشن للبنات
العاب مغامرات
العاب المشاهير
العاب الديكور
العاب باربي
العاب مكياج
العاب قص الشعر
العاب هانا مونتانا
العاب تلوين
العاب رياضية
العاب مسلية
العاب فلاش
العاب مضحكة
العاب تعليم
العاب الغاز
نكت 2010
ترفيه
منتديات الرياضه
برامج 2010
انترنت
تطوير مواقع
منتديات التصميم
التصميم
مسجات 2010
مسجات 2011
الجوال
برامج الجوال
ثيمات
منتديات الماسنجر
ماسنجر
ماسنجر 2010
ماسنجر 2011
توبيكات 2010
توبيكات 2011
فيديو 2010
فيديو 2011
صور 2010
صور 2011
صور سيارات

Re: Quid Pro No

Hard drive recovery — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:25:56 -0000

Thanks for sharing with us.

Re: Quid Pro No

uncledoug — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 01:02:46 -0000

In my humble opinion, we set ourselves up for trouble when we devise rules of conduct designed to appear as prerequisites to membership. In following these rules, we often
will come into conflict with natural conventions of behavior/conduct which are already
in practice causing a conflict, namely, should I obey the membership rule or follow my natural and usual intuition to guide my decision as to how to respond? This Would certainly cause a conflict and a resulting confrontation would ensue. This is always a problem where rules of conduct dominate over natural propensities.
This is why, in the interest of ones personal freedom to act on ones own volition,
one should keep belonging to groups and clubs and other organized activities
to a minimum. In my own case, I am a virtual hermit due to my guarding against
surrendering my personal freedom.I prefer to do my own thinking.---Doug Rosbury

Re: Quid Pro No

Bryna Jones — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:47:16 -0000

I think it really has to do with picking and choosing the moments when we can/will help others--especially those who are new to the field, but have a genuine heart to give back to others ;) I appreciate this post, because it's something I struggle with. Shameless self-promotion gives me a migraine (even when I'm shamelessly promoting myself). I find when I tie it in to a bigger cause, usually a charity for me, then I feel better about putting myself out there.

I get that it's not all about me. A trip to Africa in February of this year really hammered that home. I've never been so impressed upon to help others with the meager means I have (be they financial or through the use of my social media accounts).

But that's why I love being in PR--sometimes I get the opportunity to give without getting anything in return. Really, isn't that the best reason. It's not all about us, and what we can get. Sometimes an exchange of time/money/twitter status is just a gift. I like giving gifts. We shouldn't always expect a return, but it's nice when we get one.

Re: Quid Pro No

Tuija — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 19:48:11 -0000

Why would you follow people on Twitter any less discriminately than you'd do on Facebook or LinkedIn? In fact, why would you "befriend" anyone you don't want to, in any circumstance?

Re: Quid Pro No

Tiffany Monhollon — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:27:10 -0000

Who hasn't thought about this at one point or another?

What's difficult is when someone crosses the line and uses the relationship to create social pressure. It's so weird, because most people are conflict avoiders, right? So this is taking that on its head, because they are using the percieved distance online interactions create this illusion of, and use that as leverage to create a situation where now YOU have to avoid conflict you didn't even create!

Eban, it really resonated with me the part about social contracts. There are so many percieved social contracts out there it's silly. Because some I just flat out don't agree with on principle. But even disagreeing with an expectation could get you labelled as Mr. Bad Guy.

So, to flip this back to me, I think about the situation I was in lately where I had beta invites to a program that was doing an affiliate offer, where anyone who signed up under me would get a coupon and so would I. I wanted the coupon, but also, I didn't want to be one of "those people." So what I did was go through my address book and only e-mail the people I know personally who would actually be interested in the service -- and tell them that something was in it for me and for them.

And guess what happened? One person responded back with an affiliate offer of her own! It didn't really apply to me, so I declined it, and felt perfectly fine doing so, but I did wonder -- what does she think of me now? Did that bother her or offend her that I sent her an offer but I declined hers? Luckly she's a friend and it didn't bother her, but it did bring all these questions clearly to the forefront. Will I send out an affiliate offer like that again? In the end, is that coupon that I get worth the relationship perception I might be creating by sending it?

I don't know. What do you think?

Re: Quid Pro No

♥ Kimberly Bock ♥ — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 09:56:34 -0000

the norm from what i can see is most popular marketers want to BE followed but do not know how to be friends in return. its all business, no friendship or reciprocation unless it's of benefit to them. a threat to societal welfare as a whole. we were already disconnected from one another as caring human beings. now disconnection from humanity is at an all time high. in the online world, sadly enough, business wins humankind loses once more. ya got money, traffic and a crappy tomorrow. congratulations.

Re: Quid Pro No

Amy Shropshire — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:01:32 -0000

I think that sometimes we do take these things too seriously. We like to feel wanted, needed and when someone tells us that we just aren't interested in them, we sometimes hear that as they don't like us. I know that what I have to say may not be interesting to everyone but what they have to say might be interesting to me. I change my mind about what is interesting and I'm sure others do too. That being said, I can't say that I don't take a moment's pause when someone deletes me from Facebook (Twitter follower count I don't really pay attention to) because I like to think of that as a closer community with people with whom I've established relationships.

It's a tough decision to decide when is quid pro quo not the best choice, but hopefully you'll be better for the decision...

Re: Quid Pro No

Christina Katz — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 22:33:48 -0000

Yes, I agree. I'd love it if you'd write about the time factor. I am sad when folks seem to be in a big fat rush these days instead of favoring a take your time and do it right, kind of pace. The unholy rush isn't going to help anything. :)

Re: Quid Pro No

EricUngs — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:07:50 -0000

As your social media presence rises, I think it’s as simple as this:

Accept offers that will benefit your experience or offers that are most valuable to you.

You reached out to an individual to join your FB group for Trust Agents because you saw value and direction in it for them. If you had a side passion for real estate you would have accepted that invite because it’s another opportunity to gain valuable knowledge where your passion resides.

Thanks for the social media etiquette post.

Eric

Re: Quid Pro No

Jack Repenning — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:21:28 -0000

I think this is a collision between
- the "biologically wired" idea that social interactions always have both an overt purpose (buying groceries, liking hats) and a subtext of building community
- the "technologically wired" idea that social interactions have only overt meaning, and further that their bandwidth overload demands aggressive filtering

I think there's substance in both those ideas, and the collision and incompatibility are real. In choosing how to respond to things like this, we're choosing where we fall on the "biological to technological" continuum. We really do have to make the choice (even I do, at 250 followers, let along you at 45k!). It really is a choice between biological and technological community. I suspect the necessary advice is "try to be as biological as you possibly can, because otherwise the technological/utilitarian will steal your soul."

Re: Quid Pro No

nathanwburke — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:29:05 -0000

Chris,
Good post and I've asked the same question myself. It seems like there's an imbalance in relative value at play here. Before I dive in, I'm going to preface my comment with the fact that I have no answers and don't know what I'm talking about. But here goes.

1. The value of one fan- I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that your fan page has more fans than the real estate company's page. With that said, the value of each additional fan on your page is far less than the relative value of additional fans of the real estate company.

Additionally, I think it is fair to say that a public follow from someone with many connections (which can be seen by all his friends) is much more valuable, as friends may see a follow as an endorsement and join themselves.

So in this case, the expectation of reciprocity is really an expectation of a social "profit".

2. Free gestures vs. Paid gestures- It's amazing how much our perception of value changes when money is involved. When a person buys a product from someone, there's something beyond the cash exchange at stake.

Forget about examples in a market economy for a second. Think of the last child's birthday party you went to. When it was time to stuff money in the card, I'd be willing to bet that you gave the same amount as was given to your kid.

When money is involved, the concept of reciprocity seems to be introduced unconsciously. So when this person made the "I'll still buy your book comment", it's almost like they're saying:

"I'm hurt by the fact that you're not going to lend your name and association with my page even if it has no value to you. But I'm bigger than that. I will still continue to give you my hard-earned money for your wares. I know that it's incredibly hard to make one additional mouse click, Mr. Internet Celebrity Guy. I mean, I spend my money and all I ask for is a couple of clicks. But hey, it's not going to bother me."

The idea is that the exchange of money for the product isn't exactly a fair trade in the buyer's opinion, and that there's an expectation: Since the person parting with $$ is giving more than fair value in the deal, the seller has an obligation to do something more for the buyer if possible.

The bottom line is that some people will expect reciprocity ALL the time. Others will complain about everything you do or say. Still others will love everything you do and will never ask for anything.

We're interesting animals.

Re: Quid Pro No

Shaine Mata — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:18:41 -0000

This is where social media etiquette falls apart in my opinion. You reach a point of popularity where you are beyond the transactional realm and become a broadcast medium. While this is good for business, it forces you to play favorites with your time.

You would not expect celebrities, for example, to follow back every single one of their followers. It would be insane and pointless. Nobody expects the reciprocation because of the volume of followers they have.

Similarly, you could not meaningfully join everybody's network, because a) you would not have the time for it and b) it may be outside your area of interest.

Let's say you live to age 75. Presumably you spend one third of that sleeping, which gives you 50 years of consciousness. That yields 18250 days. If you spend five hours per day on each of your 88000 followers, you'd eventually get around to each one. Of course, this excludes family time, vacation, days when you unplug, and days you actually get work done.

The point being, anybody who expects you to sign up for every network and be a meaningful contributor has unrealistic expectations. Don't feel bad; you would not have brought any value to the network if you weren't going to engage.

Re: Quid Pro No

aboucherfuse — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:41:52 -0000

And then there's the question of obligation to those following. I've recently had many people start following me after I re-tweeted some particular items. I now feel a strange obligation to stick to this type of topic so as to not offend my followers. As a PR consultant, I have a number of clients in a wide variety of sectors and would like to be posting articles and info about any and all of those sectors, yet I feel I might disappoint. How are other consultants dealing with this? Multiple user names?

Re: Quid Pro No

Rosalie Mangino-Crandall — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:38:34 -0000

I agree. Maybe I'm taking the wrong view here, but I think it's important to connect only with things that interest or are otherwise of value to you. Otherwise it's all just numbers and there's no real commitment to any of it, which makes building relationships a challenge. I hope I don't upset anyone, but I try to only follow people I feel I can (and want) to keep up with. I probably don't really "get" social media like I should in terms of its greater implications for relationship-building and business, but I just don't understand the value to the individual in following more things than can actually be read.

Re: Quid Pro No

Tanya Marcy — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:34:33 -0000

It's amazing how many people expect equal treatment/exchange on the Internet, isn't it? I think in the beginning, we all tend to fall into that trap (I know I started to). But then I thought - wait a minute, do I really expect someone I friend/follow to do the same for me?

Then it got me thinking...it's not really a matter of "Oh, this person doesn't like me" or something of that sort, and we can certainly choose to get stuck in that mentality, but I like to think it's more of a "what can this person do for me?"

If I follow/friend someone on a social media site, it's because they have something (or are someone) that appeals to me - a music/artist band that livens up my day, a friend I've known for a long time, an actor/artist/writer/comedian/insert other profession here that speaks to me...in some way, whether small or big, I've made them a part of my life. But, and people need to really think about this - does that necessarily mean that I am a part of their life?

Maybe, maybe not. But I find sticking to this mindset is what keeps feelings from getting hurt. And who knows? Maybe in the future you'll become part of their life.

Really great point to bring up though. Keeps you thinking. :)

Re: Quid Pro No

martyglover — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:18:54 -0000

Chris,

I will say upfront I am writing this wihtout reading all of the comments. I believe one of the larger problems with social media (and the new communication paradigm???) is that people do not respect who they are interacting with as they would ahve to on the ohone or in person. If you called me on the phone and suggested Trust Agents might be useful to me I would explore the possibility and either accept or decline to engage in buying the book or discussing the concept.

At that point, I might suggest you could find value in one of our Enterprise 2.0 webinars and you might do the same. I would have NO expeectation you would tell all of your friends about our webinar, as you would have no expectation that I would buy your book if I found the ssubject matter unhelpful (not the case).

Exchange completed, no false expectations. In social media, the exchange goes like this. You post a link, Facebook page and Twitter about Trust Agents. Many people retweet, go to the Facebook page, comment on how great the concept is and, perhaps, buy the book, or not, for no reason other than to accrue the goodwill. They have now, in their mind, established a quid pro quo relationship that you will take their next tweet, Facebook page announcement or webinar/book announcement and forward it etc.

Why? Because we teach them that's how it's done. Participate, retweet, provide value, and others will reciprocate. Whether it is 100 or 1 million followers they all expect that mutual support for what is important to them, not what is important to you.

A rude monster, lacking the civility created by true intimacy, perpetuated by relative anonymity, focused on "me".

Re: Quid Pro No

MSchechter — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:07:30 -0000

Great post and I see a lot of this lately. It is almost becoming like link swapping (I'll fan your page if you fan mine). That being said, I think it is OK to say no as long as you don't mind or get frustrated that people are asking. I assume you get this a lot as people are likely not always asking you to be interested in their product, but more interested in how they use social tools for products that are likely outside your interest level.

I am fairly sure I suggested you become a fan of our page (not because I think you have immense interest in pearls, but because hopefully one day we manage to do something different enough in our promotion to capture the attention of people who do what you do). That being said, it made perfect sense that it wasn't of interest for you and could never fault you or anyone for that. It is often our job to ask and your right to say no. FB calls them Page Suggestions for a reason.

Anyone who would fault you for that is just asking too much!

P.S. I will still buy your book (no parting shot intended, just fact)

Re: Quid Pro No

Jeffrey — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 04:38:46 -0000

The interaction you describe depends on two points of view - yours and his. There is no right or wrong in this world - some people work very well giving and taking one for the other. Whereas - evidence may suggest the better relationship is to give without expecting anything in return whether you talk about Seth Gordon's permission marketing, a parent to a kid or any of our holy figures. Its true though - not feeling guilty when someone has done something for you is not an easy thing to get over. Perhaps you forget - did you expect him to buy your book? If he didn't would you think any less of him? Depending on your point of view you have an answer. In the end, I say stick to your guns - there is no way of pleasing everyone in this world - if you try you will need your laptop to keep track of all the ways you need to change in order to satisfy someone else..yikes. Good luck and thanks for the post.

Re: Quid Pro No

Kevin Palmer — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:02:49 -0000

I totally agree that it isn't fair/fun/reasonable. It seems like a situation where you can't win on a few levels. On the one hand if people see their relationship as being one sided with you because you don't always have that personal interaction with them or aren't "returning the favor" then you can be perceived as selfish.Then on the other hand if you just blindly join and do whatever to please people you not only waste your time but your interaction stops being genuine. (wow look Chris is a fan of 150,000 facebook pages!!)

Neither situation is really fair or honestly even what you are doing but it is possibly the perception on some level. The reason this perception comes about is because I think that people have THEIR use of social media as a knowledge base and place the same standards, morals, and objectives onto you or other large people which is unfair.

I've personally run into this on certain social networks and have seen other people run into it. I think what happens is that the people that have the larger profile and the following have to sacrifice the potential reaction on either side by using the tool the way THEY want to and how THEY are going to enjoy it. I think you are pretty transparent in explaining how you use these sites but perhaps people need to be educated on the differences between how you use the tools now versus how you used them years ago.

I just find this interesting because there are so many levels to this. You have public perception, relationships, logistics, attitude, philosophy, and popularity issues all rolled into one situation.

Re: Quid Pro No

Wild_Scotsman — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:38:17 -0000

The answer is, "NO". If people make the conscious choice to "follow" you on twitter or any medium they do so out of their own interest. If they are looking to gain some kind of validation than they need to do the due diligence to gain such validation (if possible) but realize that it is not guarenteed.

For example:
I can get a gym membership but after one year not look any different. The act of getting the membership does not change my level of fitness or make me a world class bodybuilder. I can work out for a year and become more fit but still not be a bodybuilder, however, I may get to know everyone at the gym. I have achieved my goal of becoming a more healthy person.

If a person follows your lead, buys your books, and attends the seminars they may never be a guru or get your validation, however, they might be more prosperous and be seen as a success in the circles they travel.

Cheers,

Jeff

Re: Quid Pro No

Peter Weissenstein — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:22:48 -0000

Chris - I think that fake following would be tantamount to hiring someone to do all your tweets or your blog in your name. You aren't being a snob since you did not ask them to follow you in the first place. If anyone is concerned about the person's feelings I suppose you could always have a "boilerlplate I'm sorry but at this time I am not able to follow you back" template that you can go to their page and post or, a more senstitive way of doing it, might be to put something on the About Me section of your Twitter home page stating that you do not follow everyone back and while no offense is meant you are selective about whom you follow because of the amount of information you receive. The reality is that you don't need to read 10000 retweets of the same thing although that happens once in a while. Just FWIW.

Re: Quid Pro No

Danny Brown — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:41:42 -0000

Wouldn't this (fake follow being unfair) be the same as following everyone using an automated tool like SocialToo, and then unfollowing afterward when you realize they're not your mix? Someone gets notified they have a new follow, only to realize afterward it was automated. Which then makes them fell less "interesting"?

Re: Quid Pro No

ceedee20 — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:41:30 -0000

The idea of "quid pro quo" must show an agreement or understanding of mutual and equal benefit. There is also the matter of choice. If the benefit is not mutual, then why does there need to be such an agreement?

In your statement Chris, if you had too much going on or have spread yourself too thin at the time to commit to yet another social media vector, the other party needs to respect that decision and not be passive-agressive in chiding you for declining. IMHO, that shows a the selfish nature of that person's request in the first place. This leads me to believe that in fact, if you had accepted the invitation, your agreement would not have been truly "Quid pro quo" at all. Perhaps that individual was interested more in the cache of your name if associated with this new social media vector and not really interested in a mutual and equal exchange of ideas.

Re: Quid Pro No

dotcalm — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:40:54 -0000

Wow, so he engaged you in a conversation because he wanted to interact and expected you to be equally as interested in what he had to say? Then he went in for the "guilt-follow"?
I'm pretty much the opposite - I assume that many of the people I meet on twitter are very successful and may not have time for me - then I'm honored when they follow - and even more honored when someone like @ScottMonty or @skydiver actually replies to me!
Great answer Cathleen, and thanks Seth for sharing!
V-