Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )
And today on Video Friday, ‘An Interview (sort of) with a Progenitor’!!*
Wait!, if you have any questions to the effect:
a) what? that sounds just like the system I have at home, wtf !
b) what? dat don’t make no sense FUCK FUCK (did I mention) FUCK
c) what? oh how quaint! if you must try to create a video, shouldn’t you really want……
please refer to the following resources:
a) shurley-the-gurley
b) shure, you ask her
c) better pack a lunch
* oh! boy!
Succinct. To the point. Good interview.
What’s next?
Pitch forks.. Alright!!
Step it up people or we’ll turn your fuckin’ pitch forks on you. What do you mean it’s not fun? Man you guys have no sense of humor. What? Lighten up. Jeez…
Look, the bottom line is that while we do have a good time, all of this Doctrine shit is true. It’s valid, relatable and useful. Hell, it’s all around you at your disposal. You can’t tell me that after watching the video(s) you don’t have at least some sense of the three and a personal inclination as to which of the three you are. Personally I like the edge it gives me (as our Progenitor referred to in the video) best.. being a scott and all (in case you hadn’t already guessed – duh). I will be able to use that to my advantage without you even knowing it.. How about that, eh? Oh I get it now. Scotts scare you and you don’t want to be like that. “I don’t want to be a scott. scotts are mean, blah blah blah..” That’s where you’re wrong. We’re not mean. In fact, we have the most fun. No turtle-like, head-in-it’s-shell behavior here (clarks). Armchairs, slippers and pipes? We’ll leave that to the rogers.
So get your asses on board or the Doctrine-ville train is leaving without you. And you’re so gonna hate it if that happens.
Nah, we’re not really gonna come after you with pitch forks. Just wanted to get your attention.
See? We scotts are a barrel of laughs…
lol…now that we have the vote of the scottian contingency in…
the beauty part of this Doctrine (as Lou Collins used to say), is that it is not just that Ms AKH is correct in her Comment, but she is consistent with the Doctrine. (I can assure you that she did not sit down (for more than 3 seconds) and given careful thought (oh! I’m sorry I forgot we were talking about scotts) to produce a level considered, poilte Comment.)
Her Comment is as the Doctrine would tell you it would be, coming from a scott.
As was DS#1’s succinct Comment above that.
(And were a roger to Comment) we would see a tone and a shaped message that is as easily and reliably predicted as are these two examples.
So come on down! Join the fun. Ask for a (nearly) free hat (for your damn head).