You Kids Get Off My Lawn: The Remix

Today, I ordered a hat from Steep and Cheap. It didn't read the description very well until AFTER I had ordered. If I had read it, I never would have ordered the product.

Here's the description Steep and Cheap offered for an Outdoor Research brand fleece hat:

Outdoor Research Fleecy Hat - Women's

Pull on the Outdoor Research Women’s Fleecy Hat for everything from a chilly stroll through town to a day making turns on the mountain. This versatile stretch-fleece beanie also features a hidden zippered pocket inside the ear band, so you can stash a doobie for the extra long lift ride.

Yes, I wrote them a letter of complaint. Yes, I told them that skiing is a dangerous sport that requires mental alertness, coordination and dexterity. I reminded them that people die on ski slopes every year. Do I think my complaint will fall on deaf ears? No. Do I think it will be addressed in any meaningful way? No, I don't and I'll tell you why.

Below, I am including the entire conversation that I had with a rep of Steep and Cheap a while back. I was looking at products on their web page and saw a product description that included the word "shit". I wrote to the company then, just as I did today. Here is the conversation that I had with the Steep and Cheap rep. Great guy, but apparently a lone voice of reason in the company of 899 stoners. Here goes.

D: Ok, I'm an adult. And a pretty opened minded one at that. But you guys have GOT to get a clue and realize that adults are not the only ones looking at your web site. I like Backcountry.com and I like getting a good deal on Steep and Cheap, but I have just about reached my limit with your off-the-wall, cool kid-kid approach to sales that now has you cursing at me. When I read a product description like the Canada Goose M-Tech Bomber Jacket and I see the word "shit" in the description, I have to ask: whatever happened to common courtesy? Some people still believe that you don't talk like that in public or in front of strangers and certainly not in a professional environment.

Between that and the privileged, white male cluelessness of the Daily Dose, I'm just about done with the bunch of you. Can someone please tell that guy that being able to use epithets against different groups and not cause a bar fight over it does not herald the beginning of a post-racial America? I'd get truly angry except that it's obvious the guy is just ignorant. Why in the world you would want an ignorant oaf sending out emails daily to potential customers is beyond me. Maybe someone else should read his "column" before he whips them out to your readership. You know, and ask the obvious question....is this really going to help sell our products?

But cursing in product descriptions? Really, aren't you guys just a little more grown up than that?

The response came quite a bit later from Fred.

Fred: I have taken it upon myself to respond to any question regarding our content - whether it be the accuracy of a product description, or the nature of our language. First, I thank you for taking the time to express yourself.

I realized yesterday that your e-mail fell through the cracks, as I had two surgeries during January in a 7 day period - the second surgery falling on the day after you wrote to us.

To be totally frank, like you, I'm an adult (actually at 61 the oldest employee here) and pretty open minded. However, since I arrived here last May, I have been, myself, somewhat conflicted about the language that has always been characteristic of backcountry - so I have given lots of my own internal thought to this topic. and I wanted to give serious thought to the matter before writing back to you - six weeks should be more than adequate :-).

I joined the company last May as Content Manager, and I've been in corporations for nearly 25 years - but never in an organization like this one.

You are not alone in voicing concern about our language and our approach. I have always tried to reply to people with compassion and understanding. We may get 2-3 such e-mails a month on this topic.

However, the fact of the matter is, we get a exponentially greater number of e-mails from people who love our "non-conventional" approach.

(See this recent Blog Post for example: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/index.php/archives/2009/02/10/tramdock/

I've been worked over a few times for my stances on these issues, and in general, I have personal issues with the degeneration of the English language that has been abetted by the Internet. The one consolation is that we never go to the extremes that you can find nightly on television in HBO, Showtime, or any other number of venues.

We are far more circumspect about language on the backcountry site, but dogfunk and our ODAT sites really push the edgy and irreverent style. No matter what my personal feelings are, I cannot argue with the fact that this approach has worked for backcountry, the vast majority of our customers love it, and it is difficult for me to argue with success. We've grown from 3 employees in a garage about 9 years ago to over 900 employees today.

As for the guy who writes the Daily Dose - he works remotely from NY - and I've struggled to relate to his humor, his attitude, his logic and, most of all, non-linear thinking. At first, I chalked this up to being at least one or two generations off the mark. However, again, I can't tell you how many totally dedicated readers of this daily message we have - or how very many e-mails we get from customers raving about the Daily Dose and saying that they never start their day without reading it. Go figure?

So, I'm truly understanding of your position and your feelings. I'm also trying to be honest about my own conflicted thoughts on these matters, but I'll also be honest in saying that it is not likely to change in the future.

If we lose you as a customer over this issue, I am truly sorry. I, like you, have been trying to "elevate the conversation" not only here but at all times in my 60 years. Most times, I feel like the world is winning, but it doesn't stop me from trying.

Also signed
Not a prude ...but a thinker
Fred L.

Regarding the link Fred offered. It is an interesting read. The most interesting comment made there, I think, is this:

Play to your core. If you deserve to be bigger, your fans will spread the word. And don’t be afraid of offending those not in the loop. They don’t matter.

In any event, I wrote Fred back with my afterthoghts.

D: Fred,
I appreciate your response. It was kind of you. I can't recall when I have ever received a more heartfelt response to a letter (or email) to any company.

I, too have given some thought to your response and I have only this to add. It is possible to be hip and irreverent even "nonconventional" without cursing at people. I don't think the cursing adds anything to the mix that wouldn't be sufficiently hip, irreverent, or nonconventional otherwise. Furthermore, there are words that are more accepted in our society (I'm thinking things like "damn" or "hell") that could be substituted and not raise an eyebrow from me.

But "shit"? That is not an image I want brought to mind when I'm deciding whether to spend a lot of money or not.

As for the daily dose, I have not struggled to relate to the non-linear thinking. I have struggled to understand why this gentleman would select topics to discuss that in no way relate to selling outdoor gear. And honestly, some of his topics reveal a disturbing lack of empathy or even cognizance of other's perspectives and feelings. Truly, his column does nothing but scream of incredible white privilege. Just because the writer doesn't see it, doesn't mean it isn't slapping the rest of the world in the face.

I just purchased a $200 sleeping bag from backcountry.com. I worked with the folks on your live chat to achieve that order. I had to return it, so I talked to your reps on the phone. I got my replacement bag and was very happy. Very happy. Everything about your company is top of the line--except this. And I am sorry to say that despite your best efforts, I'm not willing to continue to deal with offensive language.

So yes, you have likely lost a customer. Best of luck with the hip crowd.

And in fact, I hadn't ordered anything from the company since then. But recently, I guess I forgot about my stance and reloaded the Steep and Cheap notifier on my new computer. And I hadn't really ordered anything from them until today when I saw a good deal on this hat I liked. And wouldn't you know it, the very first product I order includes language that I find offensive.

So do I think that Steep and Cheap will change its ways? No. I'm not hip. I can be ignored. However, I did also write Outdoor Research this time. I asked for their ideas on how their products are being marketed. I anxiously await some sort of response from the company whose product I actually ordered.

Until then, there is nothing for me to do but get older, less hip, and more irritated by the younger generation. There is a change happening everywhere that I just don't agree with. Examples here. Here. And here. I fear I've become obsolete and my morality is out of fashion. Sucks to be me.

Regarding Bonuses Paid to Employees of Bailed Out Financial Institutions

Bonuses paid to the professional fucktards that are driving our economy into the ground. Just another of things that make D's bullshit meter top out. As reported in the NY Times today, I just want to let some of the statements made by bank executives of bailed out financial institutions sink in.

Bank executives, who requested anonymity because they did not want to further alienate lawmakers, said their employees were on edge and many would face severe financial hardship if they were severely taxed on money already paid.

“It’ll impact tens of thousands or maybe hundreds of thousands of people,” said Alan Johnson, managing director at Johnson Associates, a compensation consulting firm in New York, noting that the tax would apply to a bonus recipient with family income of more than $250,000. “If you’re a receptionist and your husband is a doctor, your $5,000 bonus just vaporized. It’s not just the C.E.O.’s.”

Holy shit! There are receptionists at A.I.G. getting $5000 bonuses? Where the **** do I sign up for one of THOSE jobs? I worked for 15 years in various companies and institutions as a professional, a manager, and your average worker. Never in all that time did I ever receive a raise based on performance that amounted to $5,000 in a single year. And yes, I lived in an expensive urban area (Chicago). It took me YEARS to increase my salary by $5K. What in the world is a RECEPTIONIST doing that is worth that kind of bonus? On average, my salary between 1986 and 2000 increased by a little over 2% per year. The only real increases in salary I achieved were by switching companies and seeking better jobs based on increasing years of experience. Contrast my career with this:

But several executives at Wall Street banks said they were being unfairly caught up in a hasty response by Washington that would ultimately deliver a sharper blow to their companies than to A.I.G., which set off the furor. One bank executive said employees were coming into his office in tears.

Yeah. Tears suck. Just like the tears of people like me who have lost more than 50% of their retirement funds because these employees played fast and loose with the American economy and fucked the rest of us over. Remember folks, we aren't talking about poor people with low incomes. We are talking about folks with family incomes greater than $250K. We are also talking about taxpayer funds. Every company I ever worked for that had a history of giving out bonuses tied those bonuses to performance and to the overall health of the company. If the company didn't do well, bonuses were scrapped. Capish? I would like to point out that I made $15K last year. A $5K bonus would amount to 30% of my regular income. Cause you know, what I do is soooooo much less important than that of a receptionist at AIG.

When we talk about people with their freakin' priorities out of whack, I think we have hit the nail on the head. Someone needs to hit these folks in their pocketbooks. I feel sorry not one whit for the tears and tribulations of overpaid professional failures. Suck on a little hard times, you pin-stripe wearing, entitlement thugs. Kick the buggers to the curb I say, and it appears that history is on my side. For the health of the economy and for the love of justice, fire these idiots and how.

Presidential Debate, Part I: The economic crisis

Ok, I decided to give myself a 10-hour breather before diving into my review of Presidential Debate I: Foreign Policy.

The Preview. Glad Mc-too-busy-saving-the-world-to-appear-on-David-Letterman was able to make it. McCain's theatrics leading up to the debate itself were high drama. Unfortunately, trying to position yourself as Savior of Everything came off as more than a bit flaky, impulsive, and an exhibition of poor judgment rather than "maverick" or "agent of change". Four snaps for Obama's comment that presidents have to multi-task. Clear winner: Obama.

The Hallmark Moment. Obama lopes across the stage like he's f'ing Cary Grant and extends his hand in genuine friendship or at least geuine sportsmanship. By God, if he spoke with a British accent, I'd be throwing my thong up on the stage. McCain looks like he's being forced to kiss fat Aunt Helen who smells like rose water and antiseptic. Ok, I get that his arms are restricted, but is that why he can't look Obama in the face? He reminds me of Napoleon. McCain has never looked older. Obama has never looked more like the Young Turk. Clear winner of the shake off: Obama.

Opening Volley: the economic crisis.

"Gentlemen, at this very moment tonight, where do you stand on the financial recovery plan?"

Clearly, neither man understands the question. A good starting point would be to summarize the financial recovery plan. D'uh! Either they haven't read the plan or they don't want to be pinned down. Obama: oversight, collateral for taxpayers, no golden parachutes, help for homeowners. D-disappointment meter: off the charts.

MCCAIN PLAYS THE KENNEDY CARD! Yellow flag on the field! 5 yard penalty and down over.

McCain: When he began by saying "we're not talking about failure of institutions on Wall Street. We're talking about failures on Main Street" and then paused, I thought "Holy Mackeral, is he actually going to blame this on us? You know, the same good people we grow so good in our small towns? I feared this debate was over in the first four minutes. But he turned it around by talking about bi-partisanship (which caused my bullshit meter to top out after his partisanship leading up to this debate). Ok, I don't remember Dwight Eisenhower or the Normandy Invasion and I have no f'ing idea what the story about the two letters was supposed to represent. Does he think that GWB should resign? The entire Repub party in Congress? *head scratch* He had nothing else of substance to say except that this is the end of the beginning and the beginning of the end for the American economy. What a tool.

Review: I expected someone to offer a clear, concise reasoning about why the American taxpayer should shoulder this burden versus, oh I don't know, the people who got us into this mess. Obama gets brownie points for getting McCain to use his dichotomy of Wall Street and Main Street. Clear winner of the economic crisis: The Republican Party and GWB who are getting off scott-free for creating then ignoring the problem over 8 years while their donors got richer. The O-lion missed a great opportunity to pick off the oldest in the herd here. Why not a little tasteful jab at McCain's shenanigans over the past week? Mewonders if Obama has the killer's instinct.

Round 2:

"...are there fundamental differences between your approach and Senator Obama's approach to what you would do as president to lead this country out of the financial crisis?"

McSnowjob: the economic crisis is the result of Republican excesses, earmarks, bear DNA.

"As president of the United States, I want to assure you, I've got a pen. This one's kind of old. I've got a pen, and I'm going to veto every single spending bill that comes across my desk. I will make them famous. You will know their names."

Back away! Quickly! He has a pen! And if the ink hasn't dried up, he's going to veto every single spending bill that comes across his desk. Yes, government will grind to a halt. The man is so old/unprepared/confused/pissed off, he has managed to f-up his best talking point.

Obama: Why oh why, my lovely, did you not nail his ass to the wall for this answer? Oh that I could have whispered in his ear at this moment. Sometimes, my darling, you need to speak forcefully. You needed to get angry here, not rebut with complete calmness. This is not a problem of Congressional spending! This problem is a Republican fiasco caused by deregulation and Republican-sponsored raping of the American worker. I wanted to see your little bony hand pound on the lectern. A little lesson in economic theory delivered in a silver bullet to the heart would have finished that little man off. Barack, Barack, Barack. If you keep this up, I'm sliding my thong back on and crossing my legs. Clear winner: McCain for surviving to play another round.

Oooh, oooh, oooh. McCain brings up and lies about Obama's tax plan. I felt that Obama should have said things like "John, that's just plain wrong. Here is my plan...." He did a mediocre job of setting the story straight. Clear winner: Obama by default. McCain concedes that his tax plan is Bush's tax plan, a proven failure. And that he's not Miss Congeniality. Seriously. Does this dude have a beauty-queen fetish? It's kind of scary.

Round 3:

"As president, as a result of whatever financial rescue plan comes about and the billion, $700 billion, whatever it is it's going to cost, what are you going to have to give up, in terms of the priorities that you would bring as president of the United States, as a result of having to pay for the financial rescue plan?"

Obama: reasoned answer. Don't know what the budget will look like, can't predict revenues. We have to concentrate on health care, energy independence, education, and infrastructure. I love a man with good talking points. Contrast this with:

MCcain: I'd remove ethanol subsidies? Huh? You are going to pay for the bailout with ethanol subsidies? And why ethanol? No explanation. Do you want gas prices to go up for the American public? As for defense spending, I have no idea what a cost-plus contract is. Demerit points for using vernacular. I'm not sure who at Boeing or the DoD that he "fixed" or "killed" or sent to jail but he completely lost me here. Here's what I heard: "I'm a daft old man who thought my partisan tactics would work and I thought I really wasn't going to have to debate tonight so now I'm just rambling incoherently."

And then he did it. He shook me out of my apathy with two words: SPENDING FREEZE.

Spending freeze? For everything except defense, veterans affairs, and entitlement programs? No infrastructure? No more paid holidays for federal workers? No more tours at the Washington monument? No more money for NSF, NEH, NEA? No more Department of Energy? You are going to shut down 90% of government? This man is daft! Clear winner: Obama. Why is McCain still breathing. God man, do I have to slay him myself?

This is about the point when D walked away from the TV in frustration and fixed dinner.

Fade in: Is McCain really talking about taking care of our veterans? After voting against veterans issues for years? Why is Obama letting him slide? Aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrghhhhhhhhh. I must also admit that I got an ewwwwwwwww moment thinking of the Bush Administration engaging in an "orgy of spending". Trying to erase that mental image of Cheney wearing a gay motorcycle getup smacking George Bush's ass with a riding crop.

And on that note, I'm taking a mental break. More later.