Hi, what are you looking for?
This case against Starbucks reminds us to brush up on ADA compliance
Can you manage a digital PR strategy on your own?
Is a resume by ChatGPT worth charging for, or too good to be true?
Did you know influencer marketing is actually centuries old?
Mortuary workers denied overtime pay despite working the hours
Study: How do we feel about paying for our social media?
Meet Chatwise, the social media app that gives its creators equity
Reddit user? Here’s a Tweetdeck-esque browser app for you
Meta Oversight Board calls for less ambiguous nudity guidelines
Loophole allowed anyone to bypass Facebook 2FA, Meta confirms
Once these things go live it hits the admin site of the blog linked to which is where I found this little ditty. I am sure the firestorm is sure to follow. This should be UN-interesting, and very UN-Pretty.
…if I never see an UN again, it will be to soon, how about you?
I had a suspicion this was in the works and my suspicion was confirmed in an email from Brian Brady seconds ago. Zillow will...
Faux Pas Weird how in this BHB “expose,” Duct Tape Marketing is supposedly busted for posting a video, promoting “their” conference called “Unleashed” (although...
Daniel Rothamel
February 23, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Wow.
That is about all I can say.
Jay Thompson
February 23, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Interesting.
“Wouldn’t the self-proclaimed master of real estate marketing have had enough savvy to secure the domain name BloodhoundUnchained.com for his own conference?”
Someone’s got to be kicking them self. $8.95 is a pretty cheap price to pay.
Erion Shehaj
February 23, 2008 at 1:12 pm
When I first saw the pseudoblog for Unchained, I couldn’t help but say “Ohhh snap!” like the guy with the glasses on your post…
Brian Brady
February 23, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Astonishing, isn’t it?
What’s your take on this, Benn? Do you think this is “good marketing” or “classless sabotage”?
Jim Duncan
February 23, 2008 at 1:16 pm
I’ve been mulling over a post centered around how “Un” has lost its effectiveness and meaning – in a respectful way. There are un-conferences, un-chained, un-cons, un, un, un. un-ique.
Benn Rosales
February 23, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Brian, from a public relations stand point it is an excellent opportunity to speak to those issues in your own way that the site brings up. They’re not questions we haven’t raised at the kitchen table- especially the continued debate between Glenn and Russell.
If I were consulting for Unchained, I would use this to launch a larger strategy of building the value of unchained, minus the video and fluff. Content, content, Content.
So the short answer is I see it as neither, I see it as an opportunity. $350 or $150 is a tiny price to pay for great value. So stay on message, stop being distracted, and focus on the goal and write about nothing but the goal.
That’s my professional opinion.
Brian Brady
February 23, 2008 at 3:54 pm
“That’s my professional opinion.”
Valuable and noted. Amend that; noted well. I appreciate your candor.
My question was more directed at your opinion at the faux site. Do you think that is good marketing (on someone else’s part) or classless sabotage?
Q2: You wrote a post on RERevealed about comment transparency that I had mixed thoughts about (at the time). I suppose I respect someone’s right to be anonymous in comments so as not to get dragged into the personality conflicts. I think I’m seeing your point of view (painfully).
When a commercial site is launched, like BloodhoundUnchained.com, with a sole purpose to sabotage a commercial venture, it would be useful to expose such a person. (those who might play dirty pool, anonymously, would certainly be someone we should avoid in ANY commercial transaction).
Do you actually have the software/capability to identify the saboteur? If so, may I enlist your aid?
Benjamin Bach
February 23, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Brian, it’s classless sabotage, but to be expected.
When we ran student union campaigns at university, people would do this all the time. register a name with a misspelling, plaster that all over campus, assume people cant tell the difference. Let the amateurs play amateur games.
Thomas Johnson
February 23, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Benn: I guess the flat market means that the vendors aren’t hiring the little Gen XY techno children, and we all know idle hands are the devil’s playground.
Gotta go show a house to a buyer….
regards,
Last Man Standing
JB
February 23, 2008 at 5:23 pm
I’ve been watching this black comedy play itself out since it’s inception. The only observation I’m willing to share publicly is this.
If everyone would just step back and look closely, they’d see a whole bunch of hidden agendas — hidden in plain sight — and not well at all.
It’s my humble suggestion everyone go about their own business and see what happens at the May conference. As do most events of its kind, the attendees will surely make public their thoughts and opinions.
Until then? This is a whole bunch of kids at recess yelling ‘oh yeah!?’ back and forth to each other. The axes are grinding publicly now, many without even a pretense of stealth.
Frankly, I’m waiting until after the conference to give voice to my thoughts. There are too many outsiders talking about this for whom I hold much respect, for me to begin adding to this silly stew.
I do wish, however, that folks would at least for now, take a chill-pill and enjoy whatever view is available to them. 🙂
Brian Brady
February 23, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Thank you all for your comments and advice. I see that the saboteur has removed the site.
Benjamin, thank you for your discourse and straightforward comments, both last night and today.
Jonathan Dalton
February 23, 2008 at 6:01 pm
> Do you think that is good marketing (on someone else’s part) or classless sabotage?
Not that the comments alone were enough to sabotage Inman’s Bloggers Connect, but how is calling that conference “stoopid” any different? From what I saw on the site, most of the quotes belonged to the host of the Unchained Conference about his speakers, at least before they were his speakers.
> Come to the Blogger’s Connect keynote address and learn how to… what?
> Truly stoopid…
Um, has Glenn learned something new between then and now that will make his keynote speech suddenly of incredible value? Will he be coming out in a fright wig and clown shoes to help “the contrast …l be that much more telling.” Or is it possible opinions change when one is working on their own project.
I have to agree with Jeff in as much as the conference will stand or fall on its own content, not what any of us happen to think about the lessons being promoted.
Benn Rosales
February 23, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Brian, it’s a bunch of haters hating on the weaknesses, and obviously I think it’s horrible regardless of the label you brand it with. I’ll add for your peace of mind that I condemn this style of attack, and even if the attack came with a name, I don’t think I’d feel much differently.
But I go back to my point earlier. It is an opportunity to retool and focus more now than ever on the value you’re offering. Allowing negative attention to be the cause of interest is an awful strategy to allow to play out. In the end, the tabloid goes in the garbage and the magazine remains on the coffee table.
The value you’re offering with the talent you’re stacking is not something tossed out so easily with the recycling. Just as Bloodhound spoke out against Inman News, Bloodhound will obviously fall victim to the same as we’ve seen. You had to expect this lightning rod reaction. I agree with Jeff about the playground, but there seem to be matches and gas cans littering the playground here.
Using this analogy all one must do is remove the weaknesses, and insert constructive value- what’s left to torch? Nothing.
All I can do is a Whois and all I see is Domains by Proxy- beyond that, I’d have to be a psychic.
Unchained will be a success, and this too shall pass so long as you accept today that you cannot please everyone, and as Greg would say, you gave it everything you had.
It appears the site has been removed- so maybe it will be easier to get on with the mission at hand.
As a note, I’ve tried to call you several times but have no luck reaching you. You know my number if you’d like to chat.
Benn Rosales
February 23, 2008 at 6:36 pm
aside – comment privacy is protected speech and to divulge the writers private information is now protected by the first amendment. So in the end, the courts settled that one. I for one do not approve of silent mud slinggers but I don’t know what you can do about it.
It just came to mind though that you can see how well you can control even those that are public with who they are- it’s like herding cats. There would be no difference if a name had been connected to the site. In fact, had the name been public, it would not have been so easy for that person to remove the site and walk away- at least the way it went down, it went down.
Brian Brady
February 23, 2008 at 10:08 pm
“It appears the site has been removed- so maybe it will be easier to get on with the mission at hand”
Yep. Our conversation helped as well, Benn. I am in your debt for your counsel
Mariana
February 24, 2008 at 10:35 am
I am having a very hard time following all of this, but am glad that the site went down, Like Bejamin stated, it was just “classless sabotage.”
Incredible Agent
February 24, 2008 at 6:58 pm
IMHO it is improper. It also goes against copyright laws. Greg could easily go after that person and get the domain either way. Mostly I see it as a waste of time for whoever put it up. With all that said, it doesn’t mean their opinion isn’t warranted…just improperly expressed.
@Benn: “comment privacy is protected speech and to divulge the writers private information is now protected by the first amendment.” Could you point me to where you heard this? I would be interested in learning about some rulings regarding that. Email is best. Thanks.
Benn Rosales
February 24, 2008 at 8:41 pm
I’ll post it here for all to read. I had already consulted our attorneys which is where I get my hard facts, but here’s Joe @Sellsius on the subject.
https://blog.sellsiusrealestate.com/blogging/first-amendment-protects-anonymous-bloggers-and-comments/2007/11/22/
Jay Thompson
February 24, 2008 at 11:43 pm
“IMHO it is improper. It also goes against copyright laws. Greg could easily go after that person and get the domain either way”
Improper, probably. Goes against copyright laws? I don’t see how. *Trademark* laws maybe, if Bloodhound Unchained if it is a registered trademark (I don’t think it is – it certainly isn’t identified as such.).
Just because Greg (or whoever) started a conference and strung together two words — Bloodhound and Unchained — doesn’t mean he owns the copyright on those two words.
If that’s all it took, I’d have a “Phoenix Real Estate” conference and own that copyright….
But, I’m clearly not a copyright attorney.
Benn Rosales
February 25, 2008 at 1:15 am
speech trumps.
Maureen Francis
February 26, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Is there any such thing as bad publicity? This will only help the event garner more attention.