Nicholl 2015...

[carcar]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

Oh, I have faith in the Nicholl. 17000 reader comments, one creepy one. The Nicholl can handle it. As they have done.

[opie]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

You call highlighting a problematic comment on Nicholl's Facebook page "the bazooka option"?

Yes, the combination of going public both on FB and in the media is a dramatic move that most rational people wouldn't do before first reaching out privately to program leadership. Unless, of course, this person had a particular agenda where private resolution wasn't of value.

And what is this "public agenda" you speak of?

Attempting to make this go viral for personal exposure, obviously.

[bjamin]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

people get offended over the stupidest ****.

[boudiccarules]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

Yes, the combination of going public both on FB and in the media is a dramatic move that most rational people wouldn't do before first reaching out privately to program leadership. Unless, of course, this person had a particular agenda where private resolution wasn't of value.


Attempting to make this go viral for personal exposure, obviously.

+1

"Guerrilla Marketing" is about taking the consumer by surprise, make an indelible impression and create copious amounts of social buzz.

[UpandComing]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

Yes, the combination of going public both on FB and in the media is a dramatic move that most rational people wouldn't do before first reaching out privately to program leadership. Unless, of course, this person had a particular agenda where private resolution wasn't of value.


Attempting to make this go viral for personal exposure, obviously.

I beg to differ. Today's generation is taking their thoughts directly to social media. People share these days. There's nothing dramatic about it, and it doesn't necessarily signify an attempt to "go viral". It's just a reflection of changing times.

The Mashable thing was a step further, but I see it as a response to the Nicholl Facebook rep's very defensive and insincere comment -- which interestingly enough, hasn't been deemed worthy of criticism by most of the Rachel critics here.

[carcar]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

No, you don't think it is. But it's obviously touched a huge chord, so I can't be so dismissive of it.

I don't think the Kardashians are worthy of my personal attention, but I'd be an idiot if I didn't recognize they have a lot of social impact.

[UpandComing]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

No, you don't think it is. But it's obviously touched a huge chord, so I can't be so dismissive of it.

I don't think the Kardashians are worthy of my personal attention, but I'd be an idiot if I didn't recognize they have a lot of social impact.

Its result was dramatic, yes, but I seriously doubt, from the nature of the original comment, that Rachel expected it would generate this level of attention when she posted it.

[carcar]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

I doubt it, too.

[StoryWriter]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

people get offended over the stupidest ****.

I'm absolutely convinced that a growing percentage of the people in the United States wake up each morning with the intention of finding at least one thing to be offended by before the end of the day.

[boudiccarules]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

I doubt it, too.

"SAM"

350,000 views in less than an hour.
Believe it or not, this is power.
******************************

(BIRDMAN)

[opie]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

I'm absolutely convinced that a growing percentage of the people in the United States wake up each morning with the intention of finding at least one thing to be offended by before the end of the day.

I find that offensive.

[datahog]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

I'm absolutely convinced that a growing percentage of the people in the United States wake up each morning with the intention of finding at least one thing to be offended by before the end of the day.

Can't we all just get a bong?

[WaitForIt]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

She wasn't jokingly dismissed, she was given a POSITIVE SCORE that helped propel her script into quarterfinal status.

May we all have such "dismissal."

Since she was writing a drunken sex comedy with an obscene title, perhaps the reader thought his/her last line was a joke, or would be seen as fun. I don't know. But that's just it -- we haven't heard from that reader. But since she/he gave it a positive score, they didn't "dismiss it," nor did they dismiss the female writer -- which, by the way, they don't know if the writer is male or female.

So the fact that the person saying those things saw them as positive isn't problematic at all.

Just like a boss gropes his secretary and then gives her a promotion. What does she have to complain about? Her skirt was too short anyway, so maybe he thought she'd be down for that. Of course he didn't have to ask. He didn't mean anything by it. It's totally okay to grope women where he comes from. That's just how this town is. If you don't like it, don't come to work. Now, gee, why aren't as many women trying to work here? Let's flap our jaws about that for a while.

[opie]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

So the fact that the person saying those things saw them as positive isn't problematic at all.

That's not what happened. As I understand it, the reader gave this person a good score in spite of what they expressed (in an inappropriate way, IMO) as weakness in the story, which is fundamentally what writers seek in feedback.

[StoryWriter]

Re: Nicholl 2015...

So the fact that the person saying those things saw them as positive isn't problematic at all.

Just like a boss gropes his secretary and then gives her a promotion. What does she have to complain about? Her skirt was too short anyway, so maybe he thought she'd be down for that. Of course he didn't have to ask. He didn't mean anything by it. It's totally okay to grope women where he comes from. That's just how this town is. If you don't like it, don't come to work. Now, gee, why aren't as many women trying to work here? Let's flap our jaws about that for a while.

Yes, that's EXACTLY the same thing as the reviewer (gender unknown) giving the author of a "raunchy sex comedy", whose gender was unknown at the time, a good review and then making a suggestion (possibly as a joke) that the script might make a good porno.

The fact is, probably none of us at Done Deal knows enough to make an informed comment on this (that includes me). So it's probably best to stop hyper-leaping to cliched conclusions.

Personally, by what little I do know, I think it would be odd to give the script a positive review and then intentionally insult the author (gender unknown at the time).