I like to fly under the radar wherever possible - less attention = less stress.
I value anonymity. I am debating whether to share my identity in this place with my nearest and dearest.
Do the folk from these pages share their identity here with their significant others so they can be "looked up" and their posts read?
A simple Yes or No would be gratefully received, but further reasoning would be especially welcomed.
Dear Everybody,
Just wanted to say a big thank you for helping me with advice on this matter.
I have been surprised that the vast majority of respondents are somewhere between "guarded" and "not on your nelly" in respect to sharing your identity in this place. This aligns very much with my attitude towards my entire life frankly.
I really do appreciate everyone's time on this.
Kindest regards,
Number.
SubjectInternalSiteLinkTestPostingTwo:
Dear Everybody,
Just wanted to say a big thank you for helping me with advice on this matter.
I have been surprised that the vast majority of respondents are somewhere between "guarded" and "not on your nelly" in respect to sharing your identity in this place. This aligns very much with my attitude towards my entire life frankly.
I really do appreciate everyone's time on this.
Kindest regards,
Number.
I am not telling anybody anything about whether I have told anybody anything about this subject matter or not. :-)
It was the stuff about "depth manipulation" that I found objectionable.
It's underhand.
The negative stuff generally is, hence the need to also define the positive and neutral stuff so that it is not all cast as a malevolent issue and 'it' (whatever it happens to be) gets written off as just being doom weaving or paranoid conspiracy, involving 'argumentum add hominem' (arguments against people) rather than discussing the unmentioned subject in any specific manner.
Hence advertisers need to involve depth psychology in order to take advantage of providing for people's: emotional security, reassurance of worth, ego gratification, creative outlets, love objects, sense of power, roots and immortality ~ as listed by Vance ~ otherwise perfectly reasonable products do not sell as well as would be required to justify production cost and make a profit ~ sometimes just on account of being the wrong colour, shape or size, whether that be clothing, transport, accommodation or whatever else.
The project I chose to work on from The Hidden Persuaders involved page 13 of the Trouble With People Chapter where it stated:
The Color Research Institute conducted an experiment after it
began suspecting the reliability of people's comments. Women
while waiting for a lecture had the choice of two waiting rooms.
One was a functional modern chamber with gentle tones. It had
been carefully designed for eye ease and to promote a relaxed
feeling. The other room was a traditional room filled with period
furniture, oriental rugs, expensive-looking wallpaper.
It was found that virtually all the women instinctively went into
the Swedish modern room to do their waiting. Only when every
chair was filled did the women start to overflow into the more
ornate room. After the lecture the ladies were asked, "Which of
those two rooms do you like the better?" They looked thoughtfully
at the two rooms, and then 84 per cent of them said the period room
was the nicer room.
Which I approached from the architectural and interior design angle, on the basis that reception / waiting rooms for lectures and so forth are thoroughfares and not meant to be ornate settings for: relaxing comfort, visual stimulation and verbal discussion ~ whereas relative comfort applies most certainly yes, but nothing more than just leaving the audience to focus on what they have come to focus on in respect of the lecture. Besides which ~ period furniture, oriental rugs and wallpaper are all costly considerations that require additional and therefore excessive maintenance, and not only that they provide stimulus for discussions that distract from the theme of the lecture, performance or whatever. The blander the better almost in that most facility owners want people in and out as efficiently as possible, not standing or sitting around holding things up before or after the presentation by way of discussing or feeling comfortable with the decor and whatnot.
Of course the thing about suspecting the reliability of peoples comments depends upon their private and public personae types socially and their experiential awareness of themselves personally, along with their unconscious, subconscious and preconscious compulsions and habituations, as which need to be appropriately considered and addressed in order to afford effective sales and reliable custom.
It was the stuff about "depth manipulation" that I found objectionable.
It's underhand.
Both of you could do a lot worse than read "The Hidden Persuaders" by Vance Packard.
I had a look on the internettle for said book and first listing that came was a PDF freebie ~ so in that I needed some time off site and off the internettle, I thought having something to read for a couple of nights might be a bit of bonus in that respect. As soon as I started reading ~ I remembered having read it during my first week at college studying graphic design, so that brought back a lot of memories from that time.
Packard’s notion that motivational research etcetera were in any way new was somewhat mistaken ~ being that it has been involved through all civilisations and cultures since the earliest of times, by way of familial guidance and social governance ~ and all that philosophically, theosophically and politically etcetera involving education and propaganda, negatively, positively and neutrally.
What was new to Packard and the uninitiated was just age-old standard procedure to others, i.e., tricks of the trade and all that. Darren Brown did a couple of series called ‘Trick of the Mind’ in 2004 and 2006, where he explained and demonstrated the art of persuasion and misdirection for getting people to do as directed. Maybe give them a watch if you have not already done so, or if you fancy a refresher possibly.
The combination of those techniques and the digital age, is a bit worrysome to be honest, and I feel that the danger ought to be more widely known, in the public interest.
Also, a second opinion as to whether I should concern myself about these matters is always appreciated, even if I might not agree at the time.
Well, as is the case with most professions and practices, danger needs to addressed for the sake of safe practice, and the methodologies of safe practice need to be emphasised to a greater extent ~ being that in the given context it is the mainstay of good advertising and healthy commerce; just as much as good behaviour and healthy relationships need to be exemplified for the greater good of society.
Both of you could do a lot worse than read "The Hidden Persuaders" by Vance Packard.
I had a look on the internettle for said book and first listing that came was a PDF freebie ~ so in that I needed some time off site and off the internettle, I thought having something to read for a couple of nights might be a bit of bonus in that respect. As soon as I started reading ~ I remembered having read it during my first week at college studying graphic design, so that brought back a lot of memories from that time.
Packard’s notion that motivational research etcetera were in any way new was somewhat mistaken ~ being that it has been involved through all civilisations and cultures since the earliest of times, by way of familial guidance and social governance ~ and all that philosophically, theosophically and politically etcetera involving education and propaganda, negatively, positively and neutrally.
What was new to Packard and the uninitiated was just age-old standard procedure to others, i.e., tricks of the trade and all that. Darren Brown did a couple of series called ‘Trick of the Mind’ in 2004 and 2006, where he explained and demonstrated the art of persuasion and misdirection for getting people to do as directed. Maybe give them a watch if you have not already done so, or if you fancy a refresher possibly.
The combination of those techniques and the digital age, is a bit worrysome to be honest, and I feel that the danger ought to be more widely known, in the public interest.
Also, a second opinion as to whether I should concern myself about these matters is always appreciated, even if I might not agree at the time.
Well, as is the case with most professions and practices, danger needs to addressed for the sake of safe practice, and the methodologies of safe practice need to be emphasised to a greater extent ~ being that in the given context it is the mainstay of good advertising and healthy commerce; just as much as good behaviour and healthy relationships need to be exemplified for the greater good of society.
It was the stuff about "depth manipulation" that I found objectionable.
It's underhand.
The negative stuff generally is, hence the need to also define the positive and neutral stuff so that it is not all cast as a malevolent issue and 'it' (whatever it happens to be) gets written off as just being doom weaving or paranoid conspiracy, involving 'argumentum add hominem' (arguments against people) rather than discussing the unmentioned subject in any specific manner.
Hence advertisers need to involve depth psychology in order to take advantage of providing for people's: emotional security, reassurance of worth, ego gratification, creative outlets, love objects, sense of power, roots and immortality ~ as listed by Vance ~ otherwise perfectly reasonable products do not sell as well as would be required to justify production cost and make a profit ~ sometimes just on account of being the wrong colour, shape or size, whether that be clothing, transport, accommodation or whatever else.
The project I chose to work on from The Hidden Persuaders involved page 13 of the Trouble With People Chapter where it stated:
The Color Research Institute conducted an experiment after it
began suspecting the reliability of people's comments. Women
while waiting for a lecture had the choice of two waiting rooms.
One was a functional modern chamber with gentle tones. It had
been carefully designed for eye ease and to promote a relaxed
feeling. The other room was a traditional room filled with period
furniture, oriental rugs, expensive-looking wallpaper.
It was found that virtually all the women instinctively went into
the Swedish modern room to do their waiting. Only when every
chair was filled did the women start to overflow into the more
ornate room. After the lecture the ladies were asked, "Which of
those two rooms do you like the better?" They looked thoughtfully
at the two rooms, and then 84 per cent of them said the period room
was the nicer room.
Which I approached from the architectural and interior design angle, on the basis that reception / waiting rooms for lectures and so forth are thoroughfares and not meant to be ornate settings for: relaxing comfort, visual stimulation and verbal discussion ~ whereas relative comfort applies most certainly yes, but nothing more than just leaving the audience to focus on what they have come to focus on in respect of the lecture. Besides which ~ period furniture, oriental rugs and wallpaper are all costly considerations that require additional and therefore excessive maintenance, and not only that they provide stimulus for discussions that distract from the theme of the lecture, performance or whatever. The blander the better almost in that most facility owners want people in and out as efficiently as possible, not standing or sitting around holding things up before or after the presentation by way of discussing or feeling comfortable with the decor and whatnot.
Of course the thing about suspecting the reliability of peoples comments depends upon their private and public personae types socially and their experiential awareness of themselves personally, along with their unconscious, subconscious and preconscious compulsions and habituations, as which need to be appropriately considered and addressed in order to afford effective sales and reliable custom.
It was the stuff about "depth manipulation" that I found objectionable.
It's underhand.
