We know why you are reluctant to Comment | the Wakefield Doctrine We know why you are reluctant to Comment | the Wakefield Doctrine

We know why you are reluctant to Comment

Welacome to the aWakefielda Docttrina (dis is da tearey of die clark and da scotts and dem rogers der). This is the place you can really get something really useful from the internet experience. Really. My Doctrine, she gonna make you so a happy that you, you’re gonna wanna say, where she been all my life, eh? Its twue, its weally twue.*

Charismatic

When you  “get” this “Doctrine” you “will” finally understand why “everyone” acts like they “do”. What confused you about, these so-called “family members” and spouses (nyahh sp ow seses), all them who have been tormenting you while you try to understand what they want and give that to them. BUT! do they like WHAT you do for them? HUH? DO they? wait! wait! I can answer that question!! Call on me! Me!  The answer to your question is:
“No, no they do not”   (Thank you, thank you I studied so hard for this moment. I want to thank the Progenitor scott and the Progenitor roger and all the DownSprings, thank you! thank you! thank you!)

Welll… (as a leading scott would be heard to say, just before totally firing some poor college student who was only working at the timeshare resort for the summer, in the hopes of making some money for school). Little did they realise what they were getting themselves into… In fact, have I ever mentioned that I survived and even flourished in the totally insane, twisted-personality realm of timeshare sales? And that that was only because of my understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)? Well, I did! Remind me sometime to tell y’all about it. It’s about half interesting.)

Anyway, I think I getting back to writing about what the current thinking at the Wakefield Doctrine is, vis ‘a vis getting Readers to Comment and participate and generally get us all famous and shit. Quick background, we know people are visiting and reading the Doctrine and we know that some people come back and read on a fairly regular basis. We also know that (other than Progenitors and DownSprings) there has not been a lot of participation from these putative Readers. So, what gives?
One opinion, offered by Friend of the Doctrine Mel, is that Commenting on a blog like this is kinda intimidating. Intimidating!?! What the hell is that supposed to mean??!! Wft we ask real, real nice for people to write a Comment, we even offer to give them a frickin, free, frickin hat (for their damn frickin heads)! How intimidating is that? Hey!! I asked you a goddamn question! How-Intimidating-Is-That??!!!

So, maybe there is some possibility that people might feel that they are expected to answer in a way that might be judged. But we do not mean that. When I say, “there are no stupid questions, there are just your questions”, I mean that in a kind and supportive way. We have all been where you are, and we truly invite  a reasoned and constructive response to our Posts, do you think you can manage to muster** a little initiative and write something? If we were all rogers here, we would come right out and ask you to Comment in a way that would sound like you would be the one missing out, if you did not Comment. But then, we are not all rogers here. Are we?

While that might be the reason (for the lack of participation) I have recently come to the conclusion that we have simply failed in conveying the basic concept of the Wakefield Doctrine to you Readers. When I think about how we got to this point (of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) I realise that most of the time has been spent ‘in person’ with people and saying things like, ‘look at that person, watch how they react, they are such clarks or scotts or rogers’. Even more basic than that, the beginning of spreading the word involved people who knew the Progenitors directly, so it was so easy to say, ‘you know how roger always does that’, or ‘now watch how mad scott gets when I…’ It was very easy to convey the elements of this theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, the (future) Wakefield Doctrine.

It is just that, after the immediate circle of friends learned this thing of ours, they were telling people they knew about clarks, scotts and rogers. It became apparent (or at least seemed apparent) that people liked it and were inclined to share it with others and the Doctrine was simply enough to spread that way. And so the Wakefield Doctrine blog came into existence. But the gap, the ‘one wayedness’ of writing a blog is a difficult hurdle to overcome. Combined with what we might charitably call rudimentary writing skills, we need to find a way to communicate the fun, the positive benefits, the value of the Wakefield Doctrine in such a way, that after reading this, people will say, “Yeah I know what those people mean!”

As you see, we have the Raison-ettes writing and contributing in the hopes of providing as much of the sense of the Doctrine as is possible. Maybe the only answer is to take it on the road. Rent halls in large cities and train people directly to carry the message of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers out to the world.
Sort of like Fight Club.***

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C61olIkvoks

*    Stolen from Blazing Saddles, one of the top three funniest movies of all time
**  A ‘muster’ is an assembling of military troops for inspection. This expression, dating from 1575, first referred to passing such a review successfully (Wiktionary)
*** But without the fighting****
**** And without being Brad Pitt*****
*****Hell, without being Edward Norton

Share

clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one

Comments

  1. AKH says:

    Welcome Germany! I see that you have just “arrived.” Let’s hear what you have to say. Really. What is it that keeps drawing you back here? We would love to hear a comment from you. Don’t be shy, just write what’s going through your head at the moment as you read the Wakefield Doctrine. Love it, hate it, just curious? By the way, how the heck did you find us?

  2. AKH says:

    Bonjour la France! Qu’est-ce qui arrive ? Joli vous voir de nouveau. Que haveth vous pour dire ?

  3. AKH says:

    Oh yeah, and we can’t forget about you Studley (the UK). We are happy to see that you are a somewhat regular reader too (no, of course we’re not spying on you – take a look on the right at “Live Feed”.) But regrettably we have yet to hear from you. What’s going on across the pond? And I promise Glenn won’t say anything obnoxious about the name Studley. He’s just being a typical in your face, let’s make a joke at someone else’s expense, scottian self. Right Glenn? Play nice.

  4. Downspring#1 says:

    An example of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers from your timeshare days would/could be instructional. Perhaps begin with the resident scott(s). (I find them easiest to identify.)

  5. AKH says:

    (…now lets try to remember this right…)(…the note from AKH was totally explicit {no scott there, huh?} {{lol}}….anyway supposed to move one of these to another spot…(damn! think this supposed to go here..)

    (Better make it look on purpose!…)

    If you would all help Ms AKH welcome a new Reader! Ms AKH? Take it from here…

    I’m excited to announce that we have a new reader/follower to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of …) Let’s give CY a nice warm welcome! She is the newest self-proclaimed clark.
    We look forward to hearing from you CY!