Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers). Glad to see you and please, please make yourself at “home”. With me today, as always are the…Raisonettes’…Ms. AKH!! …DownSpring#1!!! come on out, take a bow (…ain’t they purty?…these two have to be the most capable and honorable of all the DownSprings it has ever been my pleasure to have known…) Let ’em know how much you agree…come on folks give it up for the Raisonettes!!!
Today the theme is… “low-hangin fruit”
-n
a course of action that can be undertaken quickly and easily as part of a wider range of changes or solutions to a problem: first pick the low-hanging fruit
So, to start this easy* topic, let us simply reference a Post from an earlier, more innocent time August 14…last year….damn! seemed like it was only…wait, wait…give me a minute…(…thank you AKH….it just struck me how much time has gone by…you and DS#1 …you both still read this thing…don’t you?….why yes, of course I know that….) hey! hey! come on this is ain’t no episode of Davy and Goliath ya know!!…come on as I was saying…
One of the most frequent comment/questions we get is: ‘I can see all the characteristics of all three types in myself (or another person), how do I decide which group I belong to?’ The easy, but less satisfying answer is, ‘everyone has the qualities of the three types, just one (type) tends to dominate’. (Ed. note: at the start it is easier to determine who are clarks, scotts or rogers among those around you, rather than yourself.)
So for the impatient readers (yes, I mean you, scott); following is a quick, ‘down and dirty’ guide to identifying the clarks, scotts and rogers around you:
This clip from an early Post should be helpful to our newer Readers and Visitors. Remember, you are all three (clarks, scotts and rogers) it is just that most of the time you are mostly one of the three. And it is the way that you see the world (when you are that ‘mostly’ one) that allows us to predict your behavior and actions.
So get out there and look around today, you will spot the rogers first, the scotts second (except that you will be wrong the first time but right there after) and the clarks last. Remember: clarks are trying to be noticeable by blending in, rogers want to be the center of the herd and scotts are just plain fuckin hungry…
* you did get the inference of the idiom, didn’t you?
About clarkscottroger
But of course! My entire raison d’etre is to read, comment, participate in the Wakefield Doctrine.
Who would not wish to join this fun:)
Despite being privy to the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers for many a year, I personally find it helpful (in identifying who is who) to use the comparison method. For example, in a work setting pluck 2 people out of the mix who you see regularly every day and pay attention to not only how they act individually but how they interact with each other. The dynamics tell it all. Well, almost all. Can be tricky at times.
Hello? Is there a Progenitor roger out there? Some of us would welcome your words once again. You may have noticed there has been a lack of rogerian input. What say you?
Well. seeing as how you asked so nicely…
I do generally check in to read every couple of days. Haven’t been online much lately. Have been writing first drafts of my Frederickburg idea and tossing them out the window in quick succession. Only good news is that the most recent doesn’t suck as much as the first one. Not by much, though. Maybe it’s me…
Anyway, here’s my Doctrine thought of the day.
There should be permanent bullet points on the front page. Formally written, textbook style. So that a first-time reader can get a clue as to what this is. And may want to dig a little deeper, but won’t have to decifer a bunch of arcane references to get there. Spell it out for them.
Gotta go. Work, you know. Later.
No, no, no, no. And no. You know very well that is not what was meant by “rogerian input”!
Come – get off the battlefield and give us something to chew on…..
Give us something from (the)Roger.
MissCapt 21! I need to (partially) retract my comment above. Have been giving it a little thought and your suggestion of the bullet points kept floating around in my head.
First time readers will not necessarily explore any page(s) other than the opening page. The bulleted basics would perhaps hook them. Kind of like the Wakefield Doctrine for Dummies….
Not a bad thing.
(“Arcane”? Really?)