[Strawbale] re free music

[Mark Piepkorn]

At 01:47 PM 6/7/2007, Michael K. lough wrote:
>Once upon a time I wrote to demographic criteria 
>for a living and often was told that a 
>particular "audience" (as you interestingly 
>describe the list members) could not be 
>underestimated in its ability to misunderstand a 
>message and that the first principle of legal 
>disclaimers is that the small print regardless 
>of how small it actually is must be included in 
>any "ad" (or in this case friendly note to the list).

         Wasn't that the nature of the job (which 
also included a legal component far beyond the 
scope of a simple post to an email list)? There's 
no denying that some people don't read carefully, 
don't have common sense, are just plain dense, or 
something else. That group might be considered 
the lowest common denominator... but I wouldn't 
consider them the majority, personally. Not by a long stretch.


>If memory serves me well I do recall  that time 
>based offers requiring a future action like 
>cancellation or indeed the classic money back 
>guarantee on return of an item relied 
>significantly on human frailty to forget to 
>cancel or the ability to stick the delivery box  back together again.

         I think most people recognize that. Most 
is not all. Does that mean that I'm enabling 
corporate bloodsuckers? An argument could be 
made, and I suspect that you might go ahead and make it.


>>          I do tend to think that almost 
>> everybody is a lot more intelligent than 
>> almost everybody else gives them credit for.
>
>This is your charity to almost "everybody ? Or 
>perhaps your condemnation of almost "everybody else" ? Or something else?

         Charity? No. Respect? Yes. And you're 
right, it's both praise and blame. I was hoping people would pick up on that.


>Its a natural thing to use ones intuitiuon based 
>on received information (right or wrong) to form 
>a basis upon which to communicate.

         Right. My intuition based on received 
information is that most people are pretty smart. 
And that most people think they're smarter than 
most of the other people around them, when 
they're not. How do I know this? 'Cause I'm smarter than everyone else.


>I would not for however EXPECT anyone to be 
>aware of what I know as a form of respect for 
>them as a human being, I would far rather be the 
>butt of their contempt but be consoled in 
>knowing that I have saved one person from paying 
>for something because their short term memory 
>loss  made them forget to cancel the deal


         Good for you - that's a valid stance, 
too. So, if somebody with short-term memory loss 
signs up, do you think they'll remember having 
read your email? Or was your intention to warn 
them against signing up? Maybe your intention was 
full disclosure; if so, I think you should 
probably have also copied the terms and 
conditions from the vendor's website, which 
contains all the legal minutiae you were talking 
about in your opening to this email.


>I dont think its got anything to do with 
>"intelligence" 
or is that intelligences
?

         I do. Not in every case, but generally.


>>I'm just a convulsing wad of contradictions.)
>
>might rhyme with "partly truth and partly fiction"?

         Yes! I like that.



Mark Piepkorn
www.potkettleblack.com

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,
they are not certain, and as far as they are
certain, they do not refer to reality.
   - Albert Einstein