April 15, 2005

“the market for something to complain about is infinite”

zzzzazzdggg26.jpg
This made my day. From Thom Law­rence:

It’s inte­res­ting that there’s a bit of a bac­klash over at gaping­void. The whole English Cut thing has to stand as the best exam­ple of Cluetrain-style thin­king actually brin­ging in the Hou­blons. And Hugh’s done a great job hel­ping Tho­mas get the word out. But some of the cal­mer pos­ters in that thread are right — it’s not news any­more, and it’s get­ting a bit stale.
I sup­pose what’s hap­pe­ned is this:

Clue­train works.
What’s next? 

Took the dino­saurs thou­sands of years to die out, and the mam­mals millions of years to get to the moon. I ima­gine the inte­rreg­num was lar­gely like this: a lot of opposable-thumb-pointing but not much progress.

In the com­ments I reply:

Heh. I actually agree with you.
Still, it follows a pat­tern.
I write about something and it takes over my life. Then it gets old. Then I find something new to write about.
This hap­pe­ned with “How To Be Crea­tive”, “The Hugh­train” and now English Cut.
Usually when I’ve been over­do­sing on a sub­ject, the best cure is just to spend more time dra­wing car­toons. It clears the head pretty effec­ti­vely.
Thanks for the feedback =)

“Clue­train works. What’s next?” Exactly.

31 Responses to ““the market for something to complain about is infinite””

  1. Free­Text­Box Woes

  2. Jasper says:

    You know, I’m just not con­vin­ced about this whole Clue­train thingy. You’re a com­pe­lling and insight­ful wri­ter that peo­ple res­pect and admire. Thus you ask us to buy suits and we do. That’s not a repea­ta­ble busi­ness model for those of us not bles­sed such a fine fist. I’ve got a blog with a few regu­lar rea­ders, but I’ll be dam­ned if anyone would buy a 5 grand suit on my advice.
    I bet Tho­mas has sold suits to some of your rea­ders who haven’t event read the English Cut. I bet if you hadn’t pro­mo­ted the English Cut his blog-based sales wouldn’t have taken off.
    C’mon. You can’t invent a con­cept and claim to be its num­ber 1 suc­cess story at the same time.

  3. nelbo says:

    Can’t say I didn’t warn you, bro.

  4. mamagiggle says:

    Is there a car­toon that goes “quiet des­pe­ra­tion is for suc­kers” or was I ima­gi­ning that?
    T-shirts?

  5. joehumanist says:

    As one of your rab­ble of 100,000 who’s trying to make blogs work for my (obs­cure) clients, I’d sug­gest that you start from scratch for someone.
    Give it 3 or 6 mos, don’t link to them from gaping­void, don’t let on that you’re behind the effort.
    See if you can get some sem­blance of visi­bi­lity for a here­to­fore name­less, face­less Every­blog­ger.
    Call it covert-train or some other cle­ver deri­vi­tive, and really prove your point to the rest of us who are trying to scale the wall of power laws.

  6. hugh macleod says:

    Hey Every­body, thanks for the feed­back. All great advice. Seriously.
    Nelbo, yes, you’re right. You did warn me ;-)

  7. frosty says:

    I doubt if anyone bought a Tom suit just because of Hugh. Peo­ple don’t spend that kind of money on things they don’t already covet. (Or, if the five grand is mea­nin­gless to them, they don’t spend that kind of time get­ting mea­su­red.)
    I think the magic here was that Hugh poin­ted peo­ple who didn’t have any par­ti­cu­lar tai­lor in mind in the direc­tion of one par­ti­cu­larly clue­ful elite suit­ma­ker. And of course remin­ded a lot of us of our latent, occa­sio­nal lust for high-quality, hand-made things with good sto­ries behind them.
    For me at least, Hugh’s at his best when he’s rif­fing on crea­tive mar­ke­ting ideas. Par­ti­cu­larly about bran­ding.
    The thing that’s get­ting old about English Cut is not English Cut itself, not the story behind it, but the inces­sant focus on the asso­cia­ted acti­vi­ties. I’ve noti­ced a lot of “I did this, then I did that, now I’m going to do this at noon” type of pos­ting lately, and that’s very much not what attrac­ted me to the Gaping Void. It’s star­ting to get a little too meta for my taste lately.
    Per­so­nally, I’d like to see the English Cut story con­ti­nue, but not on the front page. Maybe in another sec­tion. Or maybe in the side­bar. Or maybe on English Cut itself, as a guest wri­ter. Fea­ture the major deve­lop­ments, but move the details elsewhere.
    Any­way, that’s my 3.8 Forints. I’ve only been coming here for about a month, so make of it what you will.

  8. At first, because Hugh’s pretty popu­lar, I did won­der if English Cut was a suc­cess purely because it was the first bes­poke out­fit to really _go after_ peo­ple and do some half­way decent adver­ti­sing.
    But you’re not buying a suit on _Hugh’s_ advice. You’re buying it on Thomas’s. If the guy was an oaf, you’d know it imme­dia­tely. There’s been an advert for Young Adam down the side of gaping­void for months, and I don’t have the sligh­test temp­ta­tion to see it (no offence) because it doesn’t look like my kind of thing.
    I don’t see that it’s chea­ting the Clue­train for Hugh to _start_ the con­ver­sa­tion. But it got a whole lot smar­ter when Tho­mas star­ted tal­king.
    Any­way, I com­plai­ned about this being a stale sub­ject and I’m ram­bling on.
    joehumanist’s idea sounds just like what Hugh was trying to achieve with the Hugh­train before English Cut took off — a behind-the-scenes men­to­ring approach. Email and IM and stuff. How _did_ that go?

  9. I’d like to know where joe huma­nist has his blog. When I read what he wrote I was going to go check it out and give him a link (unless it was totally not my cup of tea). Start there.
    I’m fin­ding that it makes more sense to start con­ver­sa­tions in the com­ments. Whuf­fie takes time.
    You can try and break into the con­ver­sa­tion with Suw, Hugh, Seth, Dan, Evelyn, but they’ve been at this a lot lon­ger than you. I’m sure that many of my reve­la­tions are of the stary-eyed, gee whiz sort that won’t stir a res­ponse from someone who’s been at it for so long.
    Anyone coming into the blo­gosphere has to rea­lize that it’s like school. There’s always a fresh­man class. Find your peers in that fresh­man class, and build your own social net­work.
    It’s not Amway. It’s not too late.

  10. jbr says:

    if someone has to ask, “what’s next?”, then you may be strug­gling with the entire clue­train “thingy”.
    there is no “next”. it is evo­lu­tion and if you want a script/guidebook, sorry. that’s not how it works. it works the same way “english cut” has wor­ked. con­nec­tions were made, con­ver­sa­tions were had and inc­rea­sed com­merce was the out­come.
    for busi­ness, as sta­ted in cluetrain’s last page, we “don’t have any magic-bullet cure”. the only real tool for busi­ness is…“imagination can finally bring the cur­tain down”.
    if you have to ask “what’s next”, then ima­gi­na­tion is appa­rently not a strong suit. in an ever inc­rea­singly con­nec­ted mar­ket­place, lack of ima­gi­na­tion is a very large lia­bi­lity. at least that’s my opinion…

  11. When I asked ‘what’s next?’ it was more of a ‘well, that’s taken care of, who’s coming down the pub’ thing, but you’re abso­lu­tely right.

  12. john t unger says:

    jbr: asking what’s next *is* basi­cally what ima­gi­na­tion is *for*. There is always a “next,” regard­less of whether we’re com­for­ta­ble or pos­tio­ned for it. Thin­king about what the next thing will be is gene­rally con­si­de­red to be more crea­tive than hap­pily tuc­king into the monu­ment of the moment and con­si­de­ring his­tory to be at a stands­till. at least, that’s my opi­nion…
    That said, there are pretty much always pre­ce­dents. Con­ver­sa­tions and word of mouth exis­ted long before Clue­train. The first cave­man who said, “hey, *these* berries don’t make my tummy hurt like those bad berries over there,” was enga­ging in word of mouth. All he nee­ded was rudi­men­tary lan­guage… heck, hand ges­tu­res would have done it. All that’s really new about Clue­train is the appli­ca­tion of long-known, time-tested evan­ge­lism to rea­dily acces­si­ble glo­bal com­mu­ni­ca­tions net­works. And maybe the idea that truth, honesty, pas­sion and authen­ti­city work bet­ter than BS when it’s so easy to fact-check… In any small village, this has been true for cen­tu­ries.
    Clue­train and Hugh­train have not yet out­li­ved their novelty, nor really hit the mains­tream so deeply as to dull the edge past use­ful­ness. But the day is in sight when we may find “con­ver­sa­tions” to be as ubi­qui­tous and anno­ying as com­mer­cial radio.
    So what’s next? I expect it will be a new fla­vor, on a new scale, of something we were pretty much aware of already. My theory? Bes­poke everything. The tech pretty much exists to have anything and everything cus­tom fabri­ca­ted at a price nearly in line with mass-manufactured pro­ducts. Once we move beyond micro-brands to desig­ning, pro­du­cing and con­su­ming everything on a per­so­nal level, I sup­pose the only brands worth tal­king about will be which fab shops have the best pri­cing, tur­na­round, tech sup­port and cus­to­mer ser­vice.
    Not ever­yone has the time or inc­li­na­tion to design their own socks and toas­ters etc, so there’ll still be room for excep­tio­nal designs from peo­ple like Phi­lippe Starke, or whoe­ver. On the other hand, when 200,000 *have* desig­ned their own toas­ter, I wouldn’t be sur­pri­sed to see open source and file sha­ring of pro­duct design specs flood the bulk of the mar­ket. Whether these will be free or just really cheap is up for grabs. Pro­bably both.
    Now that I’ve laid all that out, I sup­pose I should be get­ting over to Ama­zon and loo­king for some Chi­nese lan­guage tapes, eh?

  13. When I asked ‘what’s next?’ it was more of a ‘well, that’s taken care of, who’s coming down the pub’ thing, but you’re abso­lu­tely right.

  14. Jum­ping Into The Fray Again At gaping­void: “the mar­ket for something to com­plain about is infinite”

    Maybe the action is pic­king up again over at gaping­void as rea­der revolt spawns con­ver­sa­tion about

  15. jbr says:

    john t. enjo­yed those insights.…maybe, we don’t need chi­nese tapes just yet. at some point, i sus­pect the ebay nation will will begin to infil­trate the blo­gosphere and fill some of the cus­tom made mar­ket­place. so far, it seems ebay is a sepa­rate envi­ron­ment, but it’s not too dif­fi­cult to ima­gine a tran­si­tion…
    in fact, thin­king out loud and inten­ding no insult to Thomas/Hugh; in the rare ins­tance that they get “stif­fed” on a suit and end up with inven­tory, they “could” liqui­date that inven­tory via that mar­ket mecha­nism. i doubt this would ever occur for them, but it’s an illus­tra­tion of blu­rring the lines.
    so, yes, i agree that asking the ques­tion, “what’s next?” is a method to trig­ger ima­gi­na­tion. it’s the cons­cious ver­ba­li­za­tion of our natu­ral human nature.

  16. Timbo says:

    Alan: You’re right. It’s not too late. In fact, those of us just star­ting are right on time.
    Joe: It would be nice to see what would hap­pen without Gaping Void was­tah behind a new pro­ject. It’s pro­bably already hap­pe­ning.
    John: Bes­poke everything may be the next wave. I think peo­ple actually need FEWER choi­ces, and blogs, etc. can help us narrow the field and cut down the clut­ter.
    Then we can have “smar­ter con­ver­sa­tions” about something other than our new toaster.

  17. Timbo: Few choi­ces. Wit­ness Sam’s Club. One choice for fro­zen orange juice. Chea­per than any gro­cery store. It’s a com­mo­dity any­way. I’m lear­ning to dis­like Kro­ger with it’s cards, cupons, and sales. You’re in the gro­cery busi­ness. Give me the lowest price for the best orange juice.
    Also, with Craig’s List, I think we’re going to buy more dura­ble goods. Why buy a new exer­cise bike? You know someone is giving up on an exer­cise bike, buy it of Craig’s List. Then sell it when you are sick of it. The path from fac­tory to land­fill will no lon­ger be so direct.
    If I’m buying off Craig’s List, I’ll look for something dura­ble. Now we’re loo­king at dura­bi­lity and resale value of more than just auto­mo­bi­les. If the mate­rials we purchase retain value, we shop for maxi­mum reten­tion of value.
    English Cut is riding that wave.

  18. John T. Have you heard of Fab Labs?
    Bes­poke everything, yes.
    Design your own toas­ter, yes.
    Patents are the evil that stands in our way.

  19. I think is is a mix­ture of bes­poke and the long tail. We we all be able to assem­ble new objects tai­lo­red to our needs. The com­po­nent parts will be cap­tu­red in soft­ware (for toas­ters in CAD/CAM dia­grams). Some folks tai­lor and fit. Others con­jure up new com­po­nents.
    Nothing quite like it yet. Open source soft­ware is close, but still not ato­mic enough. The new model for soft­ware is the bes­poke and long tail pro­gram­mer.
    A long tail pro­gram­mer makes a small part to do a sin­gle task. Goo­gle rou­tes part to the appli­ca­tion where it falls into place with a happy snap. The bes­poke pro­gram­mer is the one calling together the parts to create soft­ware to tai­lo­red to fit the indi­vi­dual.
    It spills into manu­fac­tu­ring eventually.

  20. John T: you make it sound like Bes­poke Everything would mean the com­mo­di­ti­za­tion of design. I’d love to think that ‘bes­poke’ is more about colla­bo­ra­tion than it is about lis­ting my own per­so­nal requi­re­ments.
    Tom Peters says com­pa­nies should be obses­sed with cus­to­mer SUCCESS and not just cus­to­mer SERVICE. I want to see the new breed of Bes­poke Everything com­pa­nies taking my ideas and set­ting their crafts-people free on them. Give me the pro­duct I was _imagining_ not the one I was just fum­bling around trying to _describe_.

  21. Thom L: I see Bes­poke Everything as not as com­mo­di­ti­za­tion of design, rather a mat­ter of rou­ting design. Peo­ple who make the parts are going to be evol­ving a base of code. It is about colla­bo­ra­tion. Soft­ware is going to start to look like Jazz.

  22. Doc Searls says:

    I’ve been asking “what’s next” for the last six years. The next thing always comes up, along with the last thing. Like some of you say, it’s an evo­lu­tio­nary thing. Cir­cu­lar, sort of. The Invi­si­ble Hand wri­tes in cur­sive. Also in car­toons. You can’t see it if your life is the nib.
    By the way, the next step after Clue­train, IMHO, is Mar­kets are Rela­tionships. Of course, Hugh/Thomas/TheRestofUs are already there, no?
    When I stop being fat, I want one of those suits.

  23. Doc: Abso­lu­tely. It’s all about rela­tionships. Hugh has the it’s not about Who You Know, It’s Who Trusts You car­toon, which has become my man­tra.
    I think, too, that ever­yone is a futu­res mar­ket. That we’ll get paid for what we will do, not what we’ve done.

  24. jbr says:

    but, Doc, a suit by Tho­mas will accen­tuate your form and high­light your strengths/assets. peo­ple will see “you” and not a body form. they will see the inte­lli­gence, the wit…your very essence.
    that’s what a suit by Tho­mas will do for you…
    by the way, likely a fre­quent dumb ques­tion to you.…any plans for a Clue­train part deux? sort of a “let’s check in on the world and deter­mine pro­gress”? it would be an inte­res­ting post.

  25. john t unger says:

    Wow. This *is* a nice thread, eh?
    Timbo: Well, do we need fewer choi­ces, more choi­ces or bet­ter choi­ces? I think it’s really con­text depen­dent. And maybe, no pun inten­ded, a mat­ter of per­so­nal choice.
    Being able to style a com­mo­dity, appliance, or pro­duct to fit the exact vision you have for your life will cer­tainly appeal to many. The abi­lity to tai­lor things exactly to your own lifestyle, work­flow, idiosync­ra­sies etc is likely to be what really dri­ves the long tail. I figure a good exam­ple is the way Fire­fox relea­sed a strip­ped down and highly func­tio­nal brow­ser, then allo­wed *anyone* to write and dis­tri­bute plu­gins to modify its beha­vior on any level… I love tab­bed brow­sing, but hated the fact that I couldn’t drag the tabs to reor­ga­nize the order of pages. Hey, there’s a plug-in for that! If it’s hap­pe­ning in soft­ware, it will hap­pen in hard­ware too. It already is.
    As far as fewer choi­ces goes, yes, cer­tainly fil­ters will be a big part of the mar­ket­place and blogs will be one of those fil­tra­tion mecha­nisms, just as goo­gle is, or IMDB. Already, I’m quite accus­to­med to fil­te­ring all my news intake through trus­ted sour­ces who post on spe­ci­fic areas of inte­rest. Your gro­cery store metaphor is a good one… Yeah, I would love to go to a store that just has one good sim­ple choice for everything, but *my* idea of that store is not going to be the same as *your* idea of that store… Mine would have no sea­food for exam­ple. ever.
    Hence, bet­ter choi­ces. Two good models here would be ama­zon, whose recom­men­da­tions to me are gene­rally on tar­get (I know because they keep sug­ges­ting stuff I already have), and Zingerman’s, who offer many choi­ces but only the finest ones. If you can be pretty sure that *any* of the 56 kinds of olive oil are equally good, if dif­fe­rent, then it doesn’t mat­ter so much which one you grab, right? On the other hand if you feel like lear­ning more, expe­ri­men­ting, or being enter­tai­ned you might hap­pily spend 20 minu­tes taste-testing, rea­ding labels, tal­king to edu­ca­ted store clerks and so on.
    I think “bet­ter choi­ces,” like Hugh’s “bet­ter con­ver­sa­tions,” is the way to go. In fact, maybe “bet­ter choi­ces” is what we should call the next thing, eh?

  26. john t unger says:

    Alan: Yes, Fab Labs, exactly. I *so* want one deli­ve­red to my shop, like stat. heh. Also e-machineshop.com, etc. I’ve pos­ted links to a few such resour­ces over at my own blog. I didn’t rea­lize I could hot-link in the com­ments here…
    Soft­ware loo­king like jazz: Beau­ti­ful! Can I quote you on that end­lessly? I think, really, it already does.
    Patents I’ll have to get back to you on. I have issues from here to the moon with the current state of copy­right and IP law, but I just applied for a pro­vi­sio­nal patent last week. There are some things I make that I’m totally not worried about paten­ting… They’re so long tail that I should be able to fill the niche and move on before anyone tries to scoop me. There are other things I wouldn’t mind having a bit of a head start on. And then yet other things that are good ideas, but not my bag, which I’ll most likely give away just so *someone* can make them.
    Rela­tionships: Defi­ni­tely. The thing that’s less obvious for some is that you just need to intro­duce your­self some­ti­mes, in order to know peo­ple. If you’re doing everything else right, trust should follow naturally.

  27. john t unger says:

    Thom: I hate to break this to you, but design is among the most hea­vily com­mo­di­fied mar­kets out there… Desig­ners may deny this, of course, but in the end they need to eat like ever­yone else. When we do something with no regard for mar­ket for­ces, well, then, that’s “art.” I do both, some­ti­mes for the same pro­ject. Honestly, I really see nothing wrong with com­mo­di­ties, so long as they are inte­res­ting, well made, well desig­ned and don’t exceed an appro­priate level of ubi­quity. I mean, I still have no urge to kick someone just ’cause they’re lis­te­ning to an ipod, you know? Peo­ple that drive Hum­Vees, on the other hand…
    Bes­poke should be about colla­bo­ra­tion, yes. But the client’s “per­so­nal requi­re­ments” are part of that colla­bo­ra­tion. Pro­jects begin when someone sees and likes my work. Then we work together to figure out what they want, which is very much a dia­lo­gue. In fact, that’s often the lon­gest part of the pro­cess. In this rela­tionship, my job is often to help them express what they can’t quite arti­cu­late them­sel­ves — very much like what you desc­ribe at the end of your com­ment. I need to be able to mediate bet­ween what’s phy­si­cally prac­ti­cal (engi­nee­ring) and the deep inchoate lon­ging buried somewhere in the client’s heart. Then again, some­ti­mes they actually know exactly what they want. And some­ti­mes they just turn me loose, because the trust thing is wor­king and they know that they will like wha­te­ver comes out.
    “com­pa­nies should be obses­sed with cus­to­mer SUCCESS and not just cus­to­mer SERVICE.”
    Yes. Abso­lu­tely! Just like Kathy Sierra’s “I Rule” expe­rience. I also think that it can be very rear­ding for ever­yone to get the client invol­ved in the pro­cess and not just the end result. I find that much of my best work has been the stuff that had the highest colla­bo­ra­tion fac­tor. And, when finished, it also is usually the stuff that has the most per­so­nal rela­tionship to the buyer. I’m also explo­ring a new model of affi­liate invol­ve­ment over at my Art­Buzz blog.
    Hugh pos­ted about it ear­lier, but it’s evol­ved somewhat since the early ver­sion and I’d love some feed­back from any of you if you have a moment to check it out. The place to start is here.

  28. john t unger says:

    Okay, I still don’t know how to link in the com­ments after all. What I meant to say was: “The place to start is:
    http://johntunger.typepad.com/artbuzz/2005/03/welcome_to_artb.html

  29. Timbo says:

    John T: Yes, “bet­ter choi­ces” is fine, as long as I don’t spend so much time figu­ring out which ones fit that desc­rip­tion that I lose the chance to enjoy them.
    “The Invi­si­ble Hand wri­tes in cursive…You can’t see it if your life is the nib.”
    Damn, that’s good.
    “Mar­kets are rela­tionships.”
    Hmmm. That sounds pre-Cluetrain, when everything was about “rela­tionship mar­ke­ting”. Remem­ber “1 – 2-1″ and all that stuff?

  30. Patrick says:

    What’s next is that enough peo­ple get it that we aren’t having to tell big slow com­pa­nies about it, and the whole mecha­nism is wor­king bet­ter, bet­ter, best at giving peo­ple what they want when they want it where they want it, whether it is media, manu­fac­tu­red, new or used.

  31. Dave says:

    I used to visit gaping­void more often, but then it became one big adver­ti­se­ment for English Cut.
    The “con­ver­sa­tion” got boring because you always talk about the same thing.
    Less talk about English Cut, and more talk about Hugh­train kinda stuff.
    Thanks