clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 3 clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 3

CSR 101

January 8, 2010 By

( from the Roger);

     Attention…Company!   Shoulder… Arms!  By the right flank, by files left…March!  By Company into line…March!  Halt!  Order… Arms!  In place…Rest!   ( from Brig. Gen. Wm. Hardee’s North Carolina Drill Manual, pub. 1862)

     Ahh… I sometimes dearly miss the ritual of getting the attention of a group of surly re-enactors. ( Mostly Rogers with guns and edged weapons, for God’s sake.) We Rogers do so love a bit of pageantry now and then.

    The point to all that is to get your attention, of course. I had really planned on doing a quite straightforward post here, so please forgive the indulgence. I will now get right to it.

     By its very nature, the theme of this blog project needs to be repeated now and then for the sake of newcomers. Hopefully should eliminate some of that ” deer in the headlights” syndrome. ( or is that just me…) And hopefully, there will be a newcomer every so often… and if they’re browsing through all the old posts, it would be good if there were one of these ” primers” laying around. So… CSR 101.

    The main  ” voice” in this project is Clark. He is the originator of the theory. He started this blog, set up its format, checks the pertinent numbers, dots all the ‘i’s. I am Roger; I’ll do posts as the spirits command me, and until now, they have been little ” performance pieces”  from my point of view. This is the first time that I have addressed you, the inquisitive public, in a primary ” first-person” voice. As you will discern for yourselves, the forum is open to all, and there have been some very engaging conversations thus far.

    The main premise to the Wakefield Doctrine is that there are three fundamental personality types in the world. Clark and I discovered this years ago ( we are both older than dirt) through extensive discussion, debate, examination ( both the big ones and the little ones). And, being typically self- indulgent Americans, we eventually named the types after ourselves. Narcissism, plain and simple. Who, we asked the very heavens, was more important in the world than we? The Cosmos did not answer back, so… there it was. The theory of Clarks, Scotts, and Rogers. And, as a by-product, we also developed the idea that there are only three jobs in the world; scientist, salesman, and machine operator. And wouldn’t you know, the two classifications seem to interact in an almost prophetic fashion.

     A brief description of each;

     Clarks- Very cerebral by nature. Not necessarily a quiet personality, but very internally involved. Seemingly very conservative externally, there is likely a maelstrom of  abstract thinking going on in there. Scientists at the core. They think things up, invent things and ideas.

     Scotts- Very competitive and aggressive at heart. Very confident, socially outgoing in a particularly pack-oriented manner. Scotts are typically salesmen by nature. Their concerns are always highly self-motivated, and have a tremendous sense of forward momentum.

     Rogers- Very group- associated thinkers, very socially oriented.  Moderation, balance, and a sense of overall order are paramount. Machine operators at their core, they thrive in a detail- oriented environment.

     That’ s not all, of course. This is just re-stating the ground rules.  The intriguing truth of all this is that everything and everyone, ever will somehow fit into this framework. Look at yourself, your environment, anything in your universe, and it will work its way into this. Very seldom is any one person strictly defined by just one category; we are all maddeningly complicated combinations of all three. But with some poignantly uncomfortable self-analysis, you’ll find yourself gravitating more towards one type than the others. That is precisely when it starts to make sense. The stark clarity of it will give you a perspective that no one else around you has. You can not only recognize other people’s core natures, but you can predict with astounding accuracy how they will act in any situation.

     Here’s a quick example: I’m a Roger. I have done lots of different things in my life, but I identify myself primarily as a musician. I can play guitar better than most people I meet, and am quite comfortable, conversant, capable, and oriented towards the environment of professional musicianship. Pretty impressive, eh? Most people would say so. Does that make me better than them? Better than you? No, actually. But it does mean that I’m a damned good machine operator; meaning that I am skilled at a very particular thing in a very particular environment. That’s all. And that also means that there are many, many things that I haven’t a clue about, because I’ve spent so much time obsessing on the one thing. I can’t fix my toaster, but if you need to know what modal scale to use over a II-V-I chord change, I’m on it. Guy down the street makes a good living fixing toasters; I’ m just hungry because mine doesn’t work. Chew on that, Guitar Boy.

    Well, that’s probably enough CSR for one day. I’ve got to go have another crack at that toaster. Now, let’s see… put the fork in, then plug it in…

   ON THE NEXT POST: What’s the difference between the Wakefield Doctrine and the Boston Symphony Orchestra? Tune in next time on ” CSR 101″…

Share
Filed Under: clarkscottroger, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , ,

I have only one burning desire

January 7, 2010 By

Interesting Post today.  Some direct personal experience with clarks, scotts and rogers shared by the Progenitors and Downsprings that comprise the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers).

…what is that?  you want to know in Twenty five Words (25) or Less!  what exactly is the Wakefield Doctrine?  ( Who the hell let that apostic heckler in the house, damn!)

!…, they are just not gonna go away…shit, starting to piss me off…don’t they know I am the source of all wisdom in this heaven-gifted blog?   Alright, binyon!  You want to hear a whole worldview and means of understanding our fellow humans reduced to a damn TV Commercial?

The Wakefield Doctrine (trin…trin…trin) (theory of, no the certainty of…clarks, scotts and rogers… not ralph, steve and edna…clarks, scotts and rogers)

Wakefield Doctrine, the; (noun):  to see the world as another sees it, to understand not only why they act a certain way, to understand that is the only way…
(CHA…CHING! 25!  count’em twennnteeefive, not 23 not 27 Twenty Five) (and it almost makes sense, too) (take that, you Diet-of-Worms, wait for a mistake, tear down-to-try-and-be-noticed-intellectually-inconsequential, poseur!) (Yeah! I called you a poseur, and what are you going to do about it? huh? Let’s hear a retort, not so easy when you have to do more than sit in the back of the room, in the dark and  take potshots at the person standing on stage, up in the lights?) (And when the hell did this culture turn the corner where sniper was a role to be admired?)

What? is this thing still on?  Heh…heh…Lets get back to the Post and put this ‘unpleasantness’ behind us, shall we?

With the onset of the New Year, we will be trying to present the Wakefield Doctrine in ways, we hope, will make finding ‘local’ applications much easier.  (An awkward way of saying, ‘we want you to be able to read this thing once and be able to say, “yeah I know who the rogers in my life are” or “of course, so and so is what they are calling a scott“).  None of us here at the Doctrine is a professional or otherwise trained writer, (‘no!  I just won’t accept that!’).  This is not so uncommon in the, ‘desire trumps skill’ world of blog writing.  I have written elsewhere that one hundred years ago, the authors of this blog, if the wherewithal was present, would have arranged to have pamphlets printed which we would take to a busy street corner and try to inveigle the passerbys to stop and listen and take and read what we had to say.  In any decent sized town (100 years ago) you might have found one, maybe two of us engaged in such street corner/public square eccentricities.  But today….for a thousand dollars I can ‘print’ a million of my pamphlets and the the ‘street corner’ has a million passerbys who I can try and get to read my little treatise.  Some things never change.

But that was then and this is now….(no shit!, never really got why people get anything from that particular expression). But the thinking is, lets really make an effort to present the Wakefield Doctrine in personal terms, such that the first time Visitor/Reader will have a much easier time making sense of this, this…(damn, can’t find the word).  Anyway, what follows are the responses of the Progenitors and Downsprings to the question:  can you give us a brief description of people or a relationships in your life and relate it to the Wakefield Doctrine?

(From Joanne):

I was visiting Dave M., a Roger, from the Friday night gang, in the hospital yesterday. He’s ok, they’re doing tests…some heart issues. Anyway, he and I, both Rogers, started talking about our favorite TV shows..it’s funny, we were both nodding our heads in unison as we each mentioned any shows that we liked: Extreme Engineering, History channel stuff, Ask This Old House, Haulin’ House (Dave, not me…yet). Lots of how-to stuff. All of this is opposed to conversations with my friend Miki (Scott) “.just give me the damn hammer and I’ll do it. By the time you listen to all of that stuff, it could be done”. And I reply…”But not well”. We went Christmas shopping a few weeks ago, and she found a couple of things she thought would look nice on my mother and aunt. I would have thought my way out of not buying them…they just looked too big or not right, or what if she didn’t like them and would be forced to wear them. Instead, she just held them up…said” These will look great on them!” ran over to the register and bought them. Wouldn’t you know it, they looked great! Don’t know how she does it..but I’m trying to learn.

 

(From Glenn):

I was riding around in the car with my friend, Clark(a clark).   A subject comes up and he goes off on a tangent about “time-lines” and “strings”( or some such shit) and I have heard this stuff before.  I do not understand it—and it bores me.  So, I usually astrally project myself into another place and time while still listening to the drone of clark’s  narrative(the drone—not the words—the words will make your eyes bleed).  When the drone ends, we resume the conversation as if there were no tangent and as if I had been there all along.  Clark never suspects that I left.  Clarks seem to know that if they talk about some of their clarklike ideas, people will usually just not respond.  Clarks do not expect a response—and are not offended or surprised that there is no response.  Perhaps the clark says to himself after one of these musings, “I may have over-estimated this scott’s attention-span.  I better back off for awhile and talk about something less obscure and scary.  Then the scott will rejoin the conversation”.  Whatever, it all works out fine.  Fuck you most gratuitously.

(From AKH):

A long, long time ago I was the assistant to the Controller (Charlie) of a manufacturing company.  He was no doubt a Scott (just look at his title!).  Apparently there had been others before me who did not last long working with Charlie.  Most likely Rogers, as they do not have the propensity for standing up against outspoken, egotistical outsiders.  What a bunch of frickin’ spineless, whimpering babies.  Didn’t seem to bother Charlie.  Being a true Scott, he went on with the business at hand, unperturbed, pretending to be oblivious to his effect on people all the while knowing he was superior, making those sissy-assed Rogers squirm in their seats.  What an ego!  It was surprising that he didn’t fall over from weight of his large head. Very condescending with that smug grin on his face.  Needless to say (what a dumb phrase-just frickin say it), there were several Rogers at the company who couldn’t stand the guy. Always gathering (like a herd – strength in numbers) to talk about him.  They were all of the opinion that I wouldn’t last a month working for Charlie.  Being a Scott myself, I set out not only to prove their stupid asses wrong, but to prove I could stand up to another Scott without my tail between my goddamn legs.  And you ask “so did you?”  You bet your ass I did.  Long story short, Charlie and I got along quite well, constantly “sparring” in a supposedly “innocent” manner.  Overtly, and sometimes subliminally, testing each other, each of us knowing that we were right.  I outlasted my predecessors by 2 years before I had to leave due to personal reasons (no, absolutely NOT the result of working with Charlie).  In retrospect, it was actually quite stimulating working with know-it-all asshole.

From Denise:

As way of example (I will try to keep this short): in my last life I worked in a law firm.  I often had to deal with a lunatic scott attorney via telephone.  One day, trying to get a somewhat complicated settlement done, I was talking with “Joe” and thought how rude of him – he’s yelling at one of his workers when he should be giving me his full attention.  I held the phone away from my ear a few seconds and then with horror realized he was yelling at me.  This was a first for me (the being yelled at) but what surprised me more was my reaction.  I immediately (and still professionally) took hold of the situation.  I told him (in what a clark might think harsh way) I would do such and such and call him later.  Oh yeah, I slammed the phone down. When I spoke with “Joe” later that day it was as if I was his best buddy.

(to also participate, I will exert a teeny bit of editorial license and relate the story of the ‘eureka’ moment of the Wakefield Doctrine)

From Clark:

At one time in the past, Scott (the progenitor scott) worked at a music store doing, among other things, repair on equipment brought in by customers of the store. Visiting him one day I witnessed the following:

A customer came into the store and presented to Scott a ‘double cassette recorder’  (This machine had dual volume tone controls (for each cassette) and it had one master volume control).   The customer said to  Scott, “this thing is brand new, it worked for a couple of days, then it stopped working entirely, I can’t figure out what is wrong”.

Scott looked at the recorder briefly, took some electrical tape from under the counter, carefully put the tape over the master control volume (which he turned back up), slid the recorder over the counter and said to the customer, “there its all right now”.

The customer  tried the recorder, ran it through it’s paces, saw that it worked like new and walked out of the store without another word; totally satisfied that his cassette recorded had been fixed.
For whatever reason, it came to me that what I saw represented a distinctly different view of the world.  Scott saw the customer and the problem in a clearly different way and therefore his behavior was what it was.  If I had not been standing there, I am sure it would not have made the impression it did. (And I would now be typing the clark Doctrine (the theory of clarks).

Music? Of course there is music! How can you have a blog Post if you don’t have music?  You have music so you have to have a Post!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVC2cszdTao

…hey!  When was the last time we did a non-music clip? Here is a little something you might be offended by! (the acts punchline says it all). (In case of negative reaction:  lighten up).

is this thing on?

Share
Filed Under: clarkscottroger, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , ,

We the People

January 3, 2010 By

     We, the People of the Wakefield Doctrine, hereby declare that all Scotts, Clarks and Rogers are created equal; and are endowed by The Cat with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We the People also declare ourselves in support of said Doctrine, extolling it to be a heretofore unseen manner of understanding our fellow humanoids. We Hereby Pledge that our Doctrine be used only for Good, strictly to enhance our common experience with others. Furthermore, We the People resolve that the Doctrine be not used to reinforce stereotypic thinking of any sort; but rather to serve as a beacon of insightful perception.

We designate our People in the following manner; the Progenitors ( the original Clark, Scott, and Roger), the Downsprings ( second- generation veterans), and Acolytes. We hold that Acolytes will advance to the Downsprings as their knowledge and insight increases, and will also submit Posts to the Blog as they are added to the Mailing List. All adherents are encouraged, yea even required, to Submit Posts to the Blog.  All Posts are welcome, in that they serve to illuminate the tenets of the Doctrine throughout our own lives, and even into the annals of history itself. We hold these truths to be self-evident; and hold that they have been a thread throughout humanity from the Beginning.

Share
Filed Under: clarkscottroger, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

questa cosa di il nostro

January 1, 2010 By

Last of the Old and Pre of the New…from the Progenitors and (the) Downsprings, our collective wishes for a year that you will remember…

With a New Year coinciding with ‘time for a new Post’ the temptation to write a 2009 in retrospect along with a  what’s in store for the coming year Post was almost irrestible.  Fortunately, I am resisting the temptation. As enjoyable as it would be to find amusing ways to remind you, our Readers about the high points of the last six months, worse, compound the indulgence by trying to describe future Posts, I am not going to do that.

I will do what makes me feel best, which is to remind myself of the original intent and core beliefs of this ‘thing of ours'(cosa nostra).  One of the first rules was that anything that anyone of the original group (Progenitors and Downsprings) submitted to the Doctrine would be presented without edit or influence, spin or polish.
This rule has made for some ‘suspensful moments (‘jeez do you really need to call him that?”).  But all has been rendered without edit or influence; to the benefit and credit of the Wakefield Doctrine.

Not totally without a sense of tradition, and given that most of our New Year greetings are from rogers, here is a little music. (a simple link so you can play the music and continue to read this Post).

So from some of us at the Doctrine:

Old lang syne (from Phyllis)
I was going to review famous people who died in 2009, like Michael Jackson (probable Clark). However, I like to think of people that were a part of our circle.
Big Andy and Hughie (definitely the best a Roger can be. Kind, and generous, and maybe a little too emotional). 
Al and Katie (the powerful force of a Clark, Scott duo)
Russell (there is nothing like a Scott on your side). Quick little story: Most of our friends found out that I had cancer when I showed up Saturday night with a baseball cap covering a “patchy” hairdo. Most people shared a sense of concern and hopefulness. Russell came into the room. Looked at me, gasped, and yelled “Take off that cap.” As I did so, I had the feeling that Russell was going to attack my cancer bare handed. It was a very comforting feeling. 
“Let’s raise a cup of cheer. For auld lang syne”
 
And from frequently contributing Progenitor:
 
 
To the Doctrine faithful;
          
     After having pondered both weak and weary on the notion of a year-end message, I’ll just say that I am most impressed with the calibre of people who get involved with stuff like this.  To want to go to the trouble of reading blogs, nevermind writing for one, takes something quite special; as Clark will now attest to.  You pull your hair out every few days, carefully re-attach it, and repeat.  I have enjoyed it immensely, having little actual hair to be concerned over.  And, have been made aware of the vast universe of blogs; people who all do this not because they have to, but because they must.  A heartfelt salute to us all.
 
 
To our newly found readers;
 
     As our ranks have grown, we have seen this project go in some really unique and intriguing directions.  Thanks for your support and contributions, they make a world of difference, and give us an endless supply of new roads to venture down.  So welcome once again, and please feel free to throw something up onto the Doctrine wall whenever the spirit moves you; it will definitely stick.
 
                                                                                – the Roger
 
So, from all of us in the world of clarks, scotts and rogers we invite you to return and enjoy the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers).
 
Good night and…..
…..wha?  what time is it?   Oh jeez…it’s light out!  *&^%%* goddamn I fell asleep without posting this thing!!!
Man o man, now I blew it.  Perfectly good Post above but that was New Year’s Eve, even the music is New Year’s Eve,…(damn think!!!)
 
Music!
 
 
 
(OK that will keep ’em busy and put ’em in a better more New Year’s Day mood).
 
Resolutions list!  Everyone likes a resolution list, always makes them feeling that they are not so bad in comparison to the things that someone else seems to think they need to change.  (So format something quick, Leo must be over by now.)
 
On behalf of all the Progentiors and Downsprings  I Resolve for the New Year 2010:  (‘hey! can he do that?’)
                                                                                                                 * to accept the parts of ourselves that is not dominant, if a clark to accept the rogerian and scottian elements in my personality and to encourage those qualities rather than try to suppress them
                                                                                                                 * to accept those of the other types, to not be un-necessarily critical of people just because they may be rogers or scotts or clarks, rather to know when interacting with different forms that what they show as qualities I could benefit from in increasing within myself
                                                                                                                 * to work to spread the Wakefield Doctrine to everyone else on the planet, through this blog or in SL or at work or at play, in a way that is not weird or off-putting to apply the principles of attraction rather than promotion
                                                                                                                 * (finally) to do whatever needs to be done to develop and empower, to encourage and  work (including deconstructing) so that the other two aspects of my self (be it clark or scott or roger) will become more active, never replacing or threatening my original form  but complimenting and supplementing what is my dominant type.
 
 
(…”There that should hold the little bastards’…RIP Soupy Sales)
 
So Happy New Year Sloviinniaaansssssssss!! (and everyone else too, of course)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Share
Filed Under: clarkscottroger, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

hey, it’s a start

December 29, 2009 By

The Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is predicated in the notion of three ‘personality types’, or to get pseudo-technical, three sets of perceptual biases.  The distinction between personality type and perceptual bias is critical.  If one considers action/behavior and attempts to deduce the motivation, the other assumes to understand the ‘world that the individual is experiencing’ and therefore resultant behavior is easily predictable.  Let’s put it another way.
A written description of a behavior:  man walks into a room full of party goers and shouts to a person across the room’.  So, what is his inner motivation?  Damn hard question to answer, a thousand possible answers; (maybe) he is hard of hearing, the person he is calling to is hard of hearing, it is noisy…and on and on.
Now try this:  a scott walks into a room full of party goers, a roger walks into a room full of party goers, a clark walks into…(well, you get the idea)

The point of the Doctrine is this:  know how the individual is experiencing the world and you will know how she/he will act.  In any situation.  No deep background analysis necessary.

OK!

We have met the minimum educational requirement that all Posts must adhere to, on with the Interview (with the roger).

(A little set-up first.  The Progenitor roger agreed to be ‘interviewed’ by your narrator and Downspring Denise and AKH (talented newcomer).  We simply repeated the format and questions that were employed in the Interview with Downspring Glenn)

There will be music at the end (you advanced Readers can go there now, start the music to listen to as you read the following):

Intro: Today we have the pleasure to ‘interview’ none other than the Progenitor Roger, (as in ‘roger’ of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

(clark) “I’ll be the one conducting this interview for the purposes of illustrating certain aspects of the Wakefield Doctrine.  And with me are Denise and AKH.  Denise you know, cause she is one of the group of Downsprings, AKH  be writing Comments  and is way ‘up on the Doctrine.”

(clark)   So, Roger, How are you ‘today’?
(Roger)  Oh just &$%# peachy.
 *******(AKH) Hey man, What’s up your ass?
  ***********(Denise)  Really?  What do you think got his panties in a bunch?

(clark) If I can start with a question on one of the features of the Doctrine that bears your name, meaning  ‘rogerian expression’.  The full definition for any New Readers will be found here on the rogers Page.  We all know them when we hear them, there is always the ‘stunned laughter’ reaction of the listener. (My personal favorite:  ‘those salesmen, when they write blogs, they are too self-absorbent’.) So, Roger,  Do you have a favorite (rogerian expression)?
(Roger)  I always think of ” I’ll surpass on that.”  It was the first officially recognized one, and brings back pleasant memories of days of yore.  Nowadays I consider them as the fun part of forcing language to evolve as need be.

(clark) How do you explain why they are so unmistakable?
(Roger)  It’s based on seeing language as a flexible thing that sometimes needs to be tweaked a bit.  It is also a shortcut; it’s easier to twist out a new word than to go through the thought process of finding the “correct” one.
*******(Denise) The hell it is.  I think half the time it’s just how it comes out of your mouth.  But it does make me laugh.  Just admit it – you love that people get a kick out of it. 
 (Roger)  Of course I do, but it happens whether there are witnesses or not.  Inside my head, it just feels slightly …dysfunctional?

(clark)   Ok, let’s get to the same questions we asked Glenn, the other day.  What do you think about music? Take it/Leave it?  Why…
(Roger) Absolutely essential.  Every creature knows to communicate through making meaningful noise.
*******(AKH) I don’t know about it always being meaningful. Sometimes it just sucks.  But it can put me in a certain mood depending on what I’m listening to.

( Roger)  So even if you hear something you don’t like, it still represents something.  Subjectively, whenever people consider ” music”, it’s always referring first to the stuff they like.  So I consider rap and hip-hop to be ” meaningful noise” , but certainly not music. ( just my opinion)

(clark)  They say we can pick our friends but we can’t pick our family. (You have heard that saying right?)  Trade 2 family members for 2 friends. Tell us why (both getting rid of and picking up option on…like baseball).
(Roger)  I’ll trade (for) my brother-in-law Tom ( he’s actually sane anyway) and my niece Olivia, who should have been my daughter anyway.  For two draft picks to be named later.
*******(Denise) ohh… you mean you would take Tom and Olivia, who do you trade away?

 ( Roger)  Oh yeah….Olivia’s parents.  To a galaxy far, far away.

(clark) Let’s shift gears here (ha ha).  You are on the road, car behind you starts the tailgate thing, when you don’t get out of their way they do the high beam thing, what do you do?  (Same questions but this time you have your children and kids in the car.)
(Roger) See to the children’s safety at all times, period.  Much more important than your wounded sense of whatever.
*******(AKH) Yeah, those kind of drivers aren’t worth it. Besides, ignoring them probably pisses ’em off even more. ha ha

(clark)The Wakefield Doctrine…what do you think about it? strengths? weaknesses?
(Roger). Strengths… a nifty little package of psycho-tidbits that will allow you to see things that you would never consider normally.  Weaknesses…a nifty little package of psycho-tidbits that will allow you to see things that you would never consider normally.

(clark) Last question:  You can do anything you want tomorrow.  A day without consequences.  Still all of the same people and places, but you can do anything you want with that day.  What do you do and why don’t you do it today?
(Roger) I’ll take Olivia up to Lasallette to ” see the angels.”  She was there last at age two.  Couldn’t do it today because her mother is a %&^*# ing %#!#&.

(clark) Thanks for your time.  You are fairly direct and much more precise  than I thought a roger would be…
(Roger) God, you are such a Clark….
*******(Denise) …you wish you were one, dont ’cha…..

(Roger)    No, I’m good, thanks…

(clark)…yeah speaking of that, if you had to be one of the other 2 (clark or scott) which would you be for a day and why?
(Roger) I’ll go with Scott for a day, so I could kick a few pertinent asses and not fret over the consequences.  Also get a rack of ribs and maybe even cook them this time.
*******(AKH) Scott ?! Really?! I’d love to see you try to pull that off…

(Roger)   What, kicking the asses, or cooking the ribs? LOL

(clark) Well, speaking for the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) and my two very able associates, thanks a lot for a look into ‘the soft and comforting grassy plain, where you can see your herd spreading in all directions as far as the eye can see’ environment that you people call home.

(Not to get too Columbo on you…but if you been watching the stats (the little red dots on the globe thing), then you know that we are getting all international at the Doctrine. (And remember that I added to the Tips to First Time Readers that: the Doctrine ‘is both gender and culture neutral’) You being a Progenitor  anything you want to say to our international Readers that might help them ‘get the Doctrine’ quicker?
(Roger) No, that statement covers it quite well… just too bad that some cultures will be offended because we are gender and culture neutral.  What can you do?  Onward and upward….

 

Now, that was fairly informative, wasn’t it?  WELL?  WAS IT INFORMATIVE?! DO NOT!  I REPEAT, DO NOT SIT BACK WITH A SUPERCILIOUS SMILE ON YOUR FACE….

(huh!  how let that one in?)

Anyway, music time!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vAqekT-GuA

A bonus for the rogers clearly well-intentioned effort to make this Interview thing being as useful to others (herd and non-herd) Readers and new Visitors alike.  Enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJUnX1En5TM
Share
Filed Under: clarkscottroger, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »