In-Reply-To: <63950613125336/0006058685NA5EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Tue, 13 Jun 1995, Curt A. Monash wrote:

> I was struck by Steve's note saying there were about 1400 subscribers to
> this list.  Based on the posting activity, I might have guessed at 1/10th
> that number. But that would have been wrong ...

Actually, this is still an underestimate.  Many people receive highlights
via someone who actively participates.  I send updates to my boss, 
Marketing people, and peers in other departments.  I share insights 
gleaned from this list with other interested parties just in conversation.
This list probably impacts more like 14,000 people.  This doesn't 
include the writers and reporters who will take a tidbit submitted to 
this group and explode it into a full page story in the Wall Street 
Journal or the New York Times.  In the two years this list has been in 
existence, over 14,000,000 people have been impacted by it.

> So I'd like to raise the question -- why post information and opinion?  I
> imagine the same reasons apply to lists, newsgroups, etc.; only the
> technological details differ.

Information is very dry.  The internet has grown 15% this month.  That is 
fact.  Any speculation as to WHY, is 90% opinion.  The Dow has climbed 
over 200 points this year - WHY, is 90% opinion.  What gives power is to 
identify the fundamental opinions which drive these growth curves.  What
better place to identify those opinions that by monitoring and 
participating in a dialogue with 200 other analysts who specialize in 
creating and generating conversations that drive these changes.

Imagine being able to listen in on a conversation between the worlds 
greatest economists - Volker, Greenspan, Top analysts from prudential, 
Shearson, Lehman, Merrill Lynch, and Morgan Bank.  You could actually see 
the economic future of the world unfolding on your screen.

> I'd like to rule out straight queries; they're self-explanatory.  I can
> think of four types of reason (in some cases, they overlap):  
> 
> 1.  To validate your own ideas (that's certainly why I'm posting now).  This
> is sort of an advanced form of query.

There are several strategies for actively gatheriing information.  There 
is the trial balloon - let it go and see who shoots at it.  There is the 
preposterous statement - a statement or proposal that is almost absurd, 
but will cause respondants to give confidential and valuable information 
to defend a position.  There is the fake - create the appearance that you 
are going in a specific direction and find out where the consensus is 
really going.  There is the confrontational challenge - tell someone he 
doesn't know what he's talking about and watch him come up with cold hard 
facts, right out of company files.  If you want to find out what someone 
is really up to, start a really heated contriversy - soon everyone is 
pouring information into this public forum.  Finally, there is generating
the consensus - generating agreement by refining and giving up your own 
agenda as you see the possibility of a concensus.  By managing the 
consensus, you can actually stay several steps ahead of the game.

> 2.  To sell something (typically yourself, your consulting services, your
> products -- this can apply to business OR social newsgroups).

Raw selling in an electronic forum is a great challenge.  You have to 
bring something new to the table every day.  You have to create a 
possibility for the active readers.  You have to be willing to respond to 
the most aggressive attacks with responses designed to serve the attacker 
and the general listening audience.  Sun mastered this.  They would 
respond to accusations and complaints made in a forum read by thousands 
of subscribers with responses that included patch releases, source code, 
contributions to public archives, and genuine service.  Sun built most of 
it's corporate business on the internet.

> 3.  Sheer altruism (perhaps as part of the "give something back" network
> culture, although the same culture hold in non-electronic academic circles).

More acurately, sheer service.  People get out of life what they put into 
it.   Some of us put some service - a few hundred hours each - and got 
out an industry that serves several million people.  When you see someone 
start a business, from nothing, and grow it into a successful interprise 
by serving others powerfully,  it is gratifying.

> 4.  Sheer recreation (ego gratification or other).

If I just want to play, and really have fun, I go to one of the alt.* 
groups or a soc.politics group.  When I want to make a difference, I come 
here.

> I think most thoughtful posts probably fall in category #2, and the others
> are distributed among the other categories, depending in large part on the
> subject matter.

Try this, it really comes down to all four in every post.  If I wasn't 
interested and didn't want to know more, I would go to another group.  If 
I didn't see some possibility that I wanted to share with others, I 
wouldn't even want to post.  If id didn't want to make a difference in 
this area, I would do something else.  If I didn't feel I was making a 
difference in my little corner of the world, I wouldn't spend so much 
time here.

There are 16,000 news groups, 20,000 mailing lists, 4 million registered 
web pages, 20 million secondary pages, and 25 million users (about 15 
million regular users).  It's hard to imagine anyone being bored on the
internet.  At the same time, it is only useful if I bring the insights I 
get from the internet back into my "real life" - in the form of actions 
based on those insights.  Whether this means going on a date with someone
I've met over the Net (often a delightful experience), positioning my 
career in front of a trend that is predictable, or just trying out that 
new recipe for chineze chicken, the internet is only as usful as the 
action it causes.

> Comments?
> 
> Curt Monash
> President and Chief Idea Validator, Monash Information Services 
> cmonash@mcimail.com
> Never let a sense of morals keep you from doing what is right.   --Asimov
> 

	Rex Ballard
	Standard & Poor's/McGraw-Hill
	Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect
	the Management of the McGraw-Hill Companies.




From rballard@cnj.digex.net Thu Jun 29 09:02:29 1995
Status: O
X-Status: