Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )
Sweeps Week is coming to a close, time for one more Post with keywords like personality theory and the euphonious clarkscottroger and to tie it all together, leave us not forget (that we are trying our hand at ) predicting human behavior. Is this, improvisational academia1 at it’s best or what? God! I love a contest! ( Or is this a ‘challenge’…nah, more like an ordeal….heck with it, lets just call it our little secret).
As the authors of these Posts, we would be totally remiss in our duties if we did not spend as much time as possible reading articles and blogs on the subject of SEO and the effective presentation of ideas to the interent audience. Specifically, trying to learn new and better ways to present the Wakefield Doctrine to y’all. To this end, we have those little icons down at the bottom of each Post. Clicking on these allow you to ‘Share’ the Post with others on the internet. You can even do a facebook “I Approve of this Fine Post” kind of message (referral or whatever the hell they call that little thumbs up icon). In addition, we have been twittering (…tweatting?…twitterationing?) …sending out those ridiculously short, instant messages announcing each new Post. …there is a Twitter icon to the right, on this very page! Why don’t you just go ahead and click on it, send a message to @wakefielddoc.
In any event. the message of today’s Post simply is: Let us know what you think about our little blog here.
So, I was saying that we have one last opportunity (during Sweeps Week) to get the word out about the Wakefield Doctrine and I just read a blog that stated that one of the best ways to encourage Readers to write Comments is to write Posts that include ‘Numbered Lists” as a part of the plot ( ha, ha… the plot that really cracks me up! but then again it is 2:30am suppose it doesn’t take much…) Today’s Post will provide you with a numbered List of ways to spot clarks and scotts and rogers.
Oh yeah! Ms. AKH is making me write shit at these other blogsites… We are at a site called Yahoo Contributor and also some other place called Hub Pages…both of these sites have straight, serious article-things about the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers. Nothing you don’t already know, but it wouldn’t hurt if you just click on the little links and see whats up over there. So, on with the main event! This is the part that (according to the blog I read) you hvae come here to read. The List of Ways to identify clarks or scotts or rogers.
List 1
- any female person wearing more jewelry on her face or in her hair than any other part of her body….clark
- the cashier at your supermarket who manages to get you talking about why you really prefer the frozen chick pea over the fresh…roger
- the long-time friend that when you are invited (by other friends) to bring them to the party, you feel the need to explain how out-going they are and that they really are nice and will help anyone in a pinch…scott
- the spouse who will visit a near total stranger in the hospital, alone yet has to be dragged to family celebrations including but not limited to Christmas, Thanksgiving, funerals…clark
- the significant other who devotes more energy to a specific vocation/avocation than they do to their own frickin healthcare, yet guards it more jealously and with a higher degree of secretiveness than a former member of al qaeda (who has converted to Judaism) in a synagogue…roger
- you feel that even if your friends wife made your friend promise that you would never be in the same room again, all in all it was a pretty good party…scott
- you sit up at 3:05 believing that if you keep at, something amusing will occur to you and if nothing seems at all funny as you write it, that might be the indication that you are creating something that everyone else will find totally funny later, but you also recognise that you can’t take that too much to heart because that would decrease the chances of that happening…clark
- (courtesy of DS#1) …extreme shoes on the feet, if you see a person with shoes that are the fashion equivalent of a totally tricked-out low-rider car, then you are looking at a.…clark
Now, the article I was reading is emphatic that to capitalize on this technique, the author should, at the end of the Post, ask the Readers if they have any additional items to add to said list. Which is kinda too bad, because it seems around here at the Wakefield Doctrine a lot of Readers are shy about offering their opinion on matters of the Doctrine. I admit that I have made jokes about Readers writting Comments that have been a bit less sensitive to the feelings of people, in particular the one about how ‘there are no stupid questions, just your questions’…( damn! loves that joke..)
Write whatever you please.2 We will still give you a music video, even if you can’t add to our List of 7 Ways to spot a clark or a scott or a roger.
lol Somebody go call glenn, tell it’s safe to come back now….promise him he’ll like the next one…really lol
1) Totally give credit to the Progenitor roger for this little gem. ‘Improvisational academia’ does not quite rise to the level of full rogerian expression, those things are in a class by themselves! For a better understanding of these,Higgs bosons of the spoken word, go on over to the page on rogers or if you have your mind right, just go to the source, over at Gregory Campbells’ office. So you will be aware of what you are in for, allow me to cite a rogerian expression. (..written in a blog for real estate agents: “…and my opinion is that for the most part, people dislike real estate agents because they all too often come across as much too self absorbent“)
2) No, this does not apply to you, glenn…write what you would write on your little facebook page or wall or whatever they call it and you will not have to worry about your written words being adulterated by a librarian who, for whatever reason, looks like either Lenny Bruce or Bruce Jenner ( or was that Lennie Small).
About clarkscottroger
No. 1 – good but don’t forget the most obvious telltale sign….the shoes.
? and the Mysterians!!! What a gem! Mexican kids from California–making that border-rocanrol. That is rock and roll history. What a find! There was a whole “hidden” era of rock and roll history all along our border with Mexico and south of it, too. Mexican kids taking this American art form and blending with cultural elements from their country–producing some of the most driving, rythmic, pounding rock ever. Much too overlooked. Check it out sometime. Give your ears a treat. Sam the Sham and the Pharaohs, ? and the Mysterians, Richie Valens–all leading ultimately to Carlos Santana. Wonderful little cul-de-sac in rock and roll history! If you see someone gushing incoherently about simple rock and roll—probably a scott. 96 tears makes me want to dance–but without steps or organization–just wild hippy dancing. “Move to the music”. The organ “hook”–unforgettable. Look up The Sir Douglas Quintet for more of this sound,. She’s About a Mover, and Mendocino, and Is Anybody Going to San Antone? Border rock–the best!
AQnd, not for nothin’ but you can head my knuckle.
The word “and” should never be spelled with a Q. My bad.
‘Gimme a riff in a cheesy key of A’…
Laugh as we might at Vox and Farfisa keyboards, without them the musical landscape would have been totally different,
ok… ya got me on the first video. i actually took the time to figure out it was a “silent” piece and not just some badly recorded vidoe. true-to-form (scott), i kept scrolling ahead in the video (which i do with all of ’em btw unless i really like ’em) and thought “wow, this is fucked up…” so i did it. i clicked on it to watch in you tube. and there you go.
damn that ‘virtually all information is accessible’ internet!…
So the question might be why find it a curiosity, rather than a ‘waste of time’ (as another scott might?)
clarks…of course….even rogers (provided they weren’t feeling left out) and therefore needed to try and undermine the other person…
you scotts are more the standard for measuring the ‘consistancy of message’ between the three different personality types…really I’m not making this stuff up…
?
yeah, I know…anyone want to help me out here…(it does mean something, just can’t quite remember what I meant)…lol
The evidence is right here on this page. Read the comments people for the support of the Wakefield Doctrine. All that is left is a comment by a roger or the progenitor roger. But for the moment you have another clark and I’ve got a severe case of the stupids but perhaps I can help (clarks are always wanting to help. when will they learn!)
Let’s start with the here/now scotts. (the literal ones of the 3) Movement, sound, excitement?, moving pictures. It is of the immediate – therein lies the draw. AKH said it best “i kept scrolling ahead in the video (which i do with all of ‘em btw unless i really like ‘em)” scotts by nature can move in one direction a million miles a minute unless otherwise distracted but only… one thing at a time please……
clarks will do or attempt what I just did. Read, interpret shit while on whatever plane my brain just flew in on, and go on and on until someone screams to “STOP! WTF are you talking about?” (this is where a friendly roger steps in and puts everything together in one of those bakery cake boxes tied pretty with a ribbon on top.
As to my contribution. That was not the sentence that was made. There is no such thing as “extreme” in the world of a clark.
And these words?! “the fashion equivalent of a totally tricked-out low-rider car”. You owe an apology to female clarks everywhere!
which part is not a corollary?…the 27 fuzzy dice on the mirror (which is 3′ wide)? or maybe the exotic paint with the glitter-finish and the mirrored glass?… oh I understand! it is the pneumatic shocks bouncing the car up and down in a crazy exaggerated parody (a little redundant)… of the sexual promise…made by most clarklike females and never kept…or rogerian women delivered unreliably but at a too-high price…the only excpetion being scottian females (except the fat ones)…that similarity?
Corollary accepted without prejudice however, I take exception to “of the sexual promise…made by most clarklike females and never kept…” What in the world are you talking about?! There’s sex aplenty with the proper person! As a (male)clark, you would/should know that any relationship other than platonic with a female clark, is just not happinin buddy. I know of what I speak.
You are puzzled by what you call “the androgyne of female clarks“. Why is this? Is it too challenging? Too offensive? It has been my experience that this androgynous nature tends to challenge scotts. For them it is both entertaining and a little frightening.
Likewise, it is a challenge for rogers. rogers however are more embarrassed than anything else and find themselves needing to help the female clark “assimilate” into the herd – not safe to stand out in the crowd.
I would love for you to expand your statement regarding rogerian women and scottian women.
Women everywhere are waiting……..*
*what could be more terrifying for a male clark than this
I was about to chime in with a ‘ what in the world are you talking about’ comment when this took a very intriguing turn on its own; so I’ll hold off on the box and ribbons for now.
…gotta defer to DS#1…unless ‘KH, you make some sense of the thread?
all I can come up with at this place is …”the sane children are sent to a board ’em and care ’em home to get away from you abnormal…”
btw roger, we have solved the ‘over-crowding problem in the dashboard’… capacity is now 200.
Are you sure RCoyne? I want that box, pretty as can be, and I want it sooner rather than later.
All you can come up with csr is the lady!? No, mf’r you need to address everyone, especially those wearin’ decent women’s daughters clothes…
(start)…
ON THE MORROW …(stop)
PASEDENA …(stop)
THEY BE HIGHER OVER YOU …(stop)
(close)
Wow! A fuckin’ clark fight! They keep throwing more and more confusing and obscure references at each other until one blinks. By that time the rogers are all done being nervous–and the scotts are bored. You two be careful. Sure. I know. It’s all fun and games until someone dangles a participle. Clarkie–address the question that is asked, already.You done pissed off the womenfolk, yo. And they was just startin’ to talk dirty(“There’s sex aplenty”). You woulda censored it anyway. But–what about DS’s question about the roger and scott broads? Huh? What about that? You gonna answer or tap dance? You gonna describe or dissemble?
Lol. Ok-box and ribbons time.
Seems that CSR started off with a reference to recognizing clarks by footwear; but sadly, at the expense of our Hispanic friends.( Clarks apparently seldom seen in Albuquerque or L.A. ) Resident female clark (DS1) takes offense when comment is uncharacteristically brought to Stage II with challenging sexual reference.
11:55 am; Main St. Wakefield-
DS1, in decent women’s daughter’s clothes and with the sun at her back, calls for clarification.
11:57 am- weird Clint Eastwood flute music wafts down Main Street. Rogers take off in every direction. Scotts hang around doorways as if they’re not even a little scared. Pins drop. Everyone hears them. Prairie dogs are all holding hands. Paws. Whatever.
11:58 am- DS1 spits out her Juicy Fruit. Demands satisfaction. Right hand slips behind fold of attractive Western bell skirt. ( XOXOX…)
CSR, with sun in eyes and sunstroke imminent ( a hat might be construed as rogerian), grins nervously, eyes darting furtively …considers options…and goes to Stage III. Quotes Lady. Twice.
11:59 am-Scotts, claiming boredom, gather quickly in saloon. Rogers pushing each other out of way to get under the nearest bed. Not enough beds. Ever the pragmatists, the exposed rogers quickly convert to Catholicism and claim sanctuary at tricked-out Hispanic chapel down street. Become novices. Take vows.
12:00- Stage IV. DS1 checks flag flying over post office for windage. Adjusts. Lemat .44 tends to pull right; go left 5 degrees. Check. Realizes that CSR isn’t even armed.
Stage IV and not even a Red Ryder? Sheeeeiiit. Look at his crooked feet.
DS1 changes plan. Switches from Lemat to shoulder- slung period-correct Remington blackpowder coach gun. Starts to walk slowly towards hapless sunstruck victim. Left… right… etc.
Stops. Raises barrel. Cocks one back.
CSR, in quiet English desperation, makes his only move. He pulls out a draft copy of tomorrow’s post, and hands it over. It’s all he’s got.
12:01- DS1 holds the barrel level, but takes draft. Looks it over. Hands it back.
” OK for now, clean up the syntax a little and watch the language…bitch…” Turns, walks away, ablaze in sunlight. ( XOXOX…)
Scotts in saloon start to complain. Bets were made. Fight breaks out.
Rogers climb out of novice habits, break vows, head off to tricked-out pizza joint. Some stay behind. Like the clothes. Prairie dogs realize they’ve had opposable thumbs the whole time. Want guns and power tools.
12:05 pm- Dissemblage seen as better part of valor.
:):):):):):):):):):)…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….:):):):):):):):):):):):)
:)
:) !
i’m with Glenn and btw, am starting to drift away from y’all by something shiny that just caught my eyes.