How To Piss People Off … And Make Them Love You For It
How To Piss People Off … And Make Them Love You For It
by

Editor’s Note: Today’s post is a guest entry from Stuart Foster, a marketing consultant in the Boston area. He specializes in brand management, social media and blog outreach. He is a frequent commentor at SME and blogs regularly at Thelostjacket.com.

Stuart Foster
Stuart Foster

Pissing people off is an art form. Do it right and you not only incite a great conversation but you might initiate change as well. Do it wrong and end up on the wrong end of a flame war. It’s a tricky line to walk but one that I have found to be extremely effective. Here are a few tips that I utilize on a daily basis or when I’m feeling like inciting conversation:

  1. Make a statement that can be argued both ways.
    The goal: to incite a conversation/debate. This way you can facilitate all parties being heard as each side of the fence will have valid points to argue. You can even have more fun by playing devil’s advocate in comments.
  2. Don’t be afraid to take on anyone, regardless of status, notoriety, or position.
    Call out b.s. when you see it and don’t hold back. The only way you can be heard is if you are completely open with your stances, opinions and ideas. You can’t hold back or try and change your personality … if anything you should personalize things more.
  3. Take a strong initial stance but allow for circumstantial deviation.
    Allow yourself planned retreats and advances. This way you can go for the low hanging fruit and gather time to plan a counter-attack. It also allows you some legalese wiggle room.
  4. Go for the jugular when debating … but explain your points.
    You can absolutely eviscerate someone in commenting, blog posts or conversation. Just make sure you do it while making salient points. You can be a dick, just make sure your argument is practically unassailable while doing so. Pwn smartly.
  5. Do it with a smile.
    Be charming and don’t take yourself so seriously. The Fugees named a song “Killing me Softly” for a reason, do the same with your words. So go for the perception of effortless cool.
  6. Think about your points thoroughly and carefully.
    Map out ideas for any possible direction the conversation could go (and keep notes of them). I have about 4-5 notepad docs open at anytime to jot down new ideas I get.
  7. If all else fails: Laugh and move on.
    You can’t win them all but you can enjoy the defeat or victory as a win for conversation.

Being a squeaky wheel can piss people off, but it’s worth it if it drives the conversation in the right direction or gets everyone back on track.

More insight from Stuart from TheLostJacket.com:

  • Pingback: Klondike Cheats()

  • Pingback: supplemental resources()

  • Pingback: United Kingdom Pages on Wikipedia()

  • Pingback: Louboutin Espa&()

  • Suzy

    You must be really young if you think the Fugees named a song Killing Me Softly. Roberta Flack wrote it and it was a HUGE HIT in the 70’s. (80’s?) Dude!!

    • Carl

      the carpenters also covered it. he was using as an example though and not the point of the article. duh!

  • Really true man. This really has a lot of sense and relates to some of my experiences. Thanks for this article. 

  • ToddMillett

    Thanks for the great advice. Let me try it out. (because you like this, right?)

    “You can even have more fun by playing devil’s advocate in comments.”
    “The only way you can be heard is if you are completely open with your stances, opinions and ideas.”

    Ok, time to go for the jugular by calling you out on your B.S: How exactly do you plan on doing both of these at once? It isn’t possible. If you are playing devils advocate, you are choosing to contradict people’s statements regardless of what they say. If you are being completely open with your stances, opinions, and ideas, it doesn’t matter what anyone else says. You will still keep your same side.

    The second quote is accurate in my opinion, but I challenge you to find other ways of gaining recognition than intentionally pissing people off on the internet just for the sake of drawing attention to yourself and your blog. If you are always completely open with your stances, opinions, and ideas, then you won’t have to instigate. Arguments will naturally come your way when people disagree with you. Then, you can argue out of your passion for something other than arguing.

  • Haha, this is me to a T. Though I often end up on the “wrong end of a flame war” side…

  • Q Turner

    …cue the PR team freak-out in 5… 4… 3… 2… 

  • Dbestlists The Best Lists

    Thx.. for share it.

    This is my blog http://www.dbestlists.com/category/best-tumblr/

  • Most just run and gun and do stuff to deliberately grab attention
    (sometimes through not so nice means). This is merely an attempt to have
    fun with that concept and expand on it a bit.

  • Pingback: An Advertising Agency Doing Social Media Right | Social Media Explorer()

  • :D

  • :D

  • huangqin
  • David Chapman

    you're kinda weird mate. how's that for evisceratin'?

  • David Chapman

    you're kinda weird mate. how's that for evisceratin'?

  • David Chapman

    you're kinda weird mate. how's that for evisceratin'?

  • David Chapman

    you're kinda weird mate. how's that for evisceratin'?

  • David Chapman

    you're kinda weird mate. how's that for evisceratin'?

  • David Chapman

    you're kinda weird mate. how's that for evisceratin'?

  • David Chapman

    you're kinda weird mate. how's that for evisceratin'?

  • Stuart,

    Love the humorous take! Sometimes, people are so afraid of upsetting people that we play it too safe. While I don't agree with picking a fight just for the sake of picking a fight (which I don't think is what you're advocating anyway), I do think that we need be willing to step outside our comfort zones and offer opinions. Pushing the envelope isn't a bad thing!

    Heather (@prtini)

  • Stuart,

    Love the humorous take! Sometimes, people are so afraid of upsetting people that we play it too safe. While I don't agree with picking a fight just for the sake of picking a fight (which I don't think is what you're advocating anyway), I do think that we need be willing to step outside our comfort zones and offer opinions. Pushing the envelope isn't a bad thing!

    Heather (@prtini)

  • Stuart,

    Love the humorous take! Sometimes, people are so afraid of upsetting people that we play it too safe. While I don't agree with picking a fight just for the sake of picking a fight (which I don't think is what you're advocating anyway), I do think that we need be willing to step outside our comfort zones and offer opinions. Pushing the envelope isn't a bad thing!

    Heather (@prtini)

  • Stuart,

    Love the humorous take! Sometimes, people are so afraid of upsetting people that we play it too safe. While I don't agree with picking a fight just for the sake of picking a fight (which I don't think is what you're advocating anyway), I do think that we need be willing to step outside our comfort zones and offer opinions. Pushing the envelope isn't a bad thing!

    Heather (@prtini)

  • Stuart,

    Love the humorous take! Sometimes, people are so afraid of upsetting people that we play it too safe. While I don't agree with picking a fight just for the sake of picking a fight (which I don't think is what you're advocating anyway), I do think that we need be willing to step outside our comfort zones and offer opinions. Pushing the envelope isn't a bad thing!

    Heather (@prtini)

  • Stuart,

    Love the humorous take! Sometimes, people are so afraid of upsetting people that we play it too safe. While I don't agree with picking a fight just for the sake of picking a fight (which I don't think is what you're advocating anyway), I do think that we need be willing to step outside our comfort zones and offer opinions. Pushing the envelope isn't a bad thing!

    Heather (@prtini)

  • Hi Stuart:
    Hard to argue against the “I'm only kidding around” defense. That sounds suspiciously like a duck and cover strategy for your own weak argument :-) I will give you merit points for trying to have fun though.

  • Hi Stuart:
    Hard to argue against the “I'm only kidding around” defense. That sounds suspiciously like a duck and cover strategy for your own weak argument :-) I will give you merit points for trying to have fun though.

  • Hi Stuart:
    Hard to argue against the “I'm only kidding around” defense. That sounds suspiciously like a duck and cover strategy for your own weak argument :-) I will give you merit points for trying to have fun though.

  • Hi Stuart:
    Hard to argue against the “I'm only kidding around” defense. That sounds suspiciously like a duck and cover strategy for your own weak argument :-) I will give you merit points for trying to have fun though.

  • Hi Stuart:
    Hard to argue against the “I'm only kidding around” defense. That sounds suspiciously like a duck and cover strategy for your own weak argument :-) I will give you merit points for trying to have fun though.

  • Hi Stuart:
    Hard to argue against the “I'm only kidding around” defense. That sounds suspiciously like a duck and cover strategy for your own weak argument :-) I will give you merit points for trying to have fun though.

  • I'm just having fun with it. I don't take any of it very seriously (and I don't look at it as grandstanding). Getting attention is easy, maintaining it is another story entirely.

    Not everyone is as forward thinking as you are George. Most just run and gun and do stuff to deliberately grab attention (sometimes through not so nice means). This is merely an attempt to have fun with that concept and expand on it a bit.

    It is fun to destroy a weak argument though. Not going to lie about that.

  • I'm just having fun with it. I don't take any of it very seriously (and I don't look at it as grandstanding). Getting attention is easy, maintaining it is another story entirely.

    Not everyone is as forward thinking as you are George. Most just run and gun and do stuff to deliberately grab attention (sometimes through not so nice means). This is merely an attempt to have fun with that concept and expand on it a bit.

    It is fun to destroy a weak argument though. Not going to lie about that.

  • I'm just having fun with it. I don't take any of it very seriously (and I don't look at it as grandstanding). Getting attention is easy, maintaining it is another story entirely.

    Not everyone is as forward thinking as you are George. Most just run and gun and do stuff to deliberately grab attention (sometimes through not so nice means). This is merely an attempt to have fun with that concept and expand on it a bit.

    It is fun to destroy a weak argument though. Not going to lie about that.

  • I'm just having fun with it. I don't take any of it very seriously (and I don't look at it as grandstanding). Getting attention is easy, maintaining it is another story entirely.

    Not everyone is as forward thinking as you are George. Most just run and gun and do stuff to deliberately grab attention (sometimes through not so nice means). This is merely an attempt to have fun with that concept and expand on it a bit.

    It is fun to destroy a weak argument though. Not going to lie about that.

  • I'm just having fun with it. I don't take any of it very seriously (and I don't look at it as grandstanding). Getting attention is easy, maintaining it is another story entirely.

    Not everyone is as forward thinking as you are George. Most just run and gun and do stuff to deliberately grab attention (sometimes through not so nice means). This is merely an attempt to have fun with that concept and expand on it a bit.

    It is fun to destroy a weak argument though. Not going to lie about that.

  • I'm just having fun with it. I don't take any of it very seriously (and I don't look at it as grandstanding). Getting attention is easy, maintaining it is another story entirely.

    Not everyone is as forward thinking as you are George. Most just run and gun and do stuff to deliberately grab attention (sometimes through not so nice means). This is merely an attempt to have fun with that concept and expand on it a bit.

    It is fun to destroy a weak argument though. Not going to lie about that.

  • Nope :) Enjoying it immensely actually.

  • Nope :) Enjoying it immensely actually.

  • Nope :) Enjoying it immensely actually.

  • Nope :) Enjoying it immensely actually.

  • Nope :) Enjoying it immensely actually.

  • Nope :) Enjoying it immensely actually.

  • Pissing people off cuts against the grain for me. I guess I could take the usual banter but when people (that you don't even know from Adam or Eve) starts calling you names, unprintable ones, I call my lawyer.

    This happened to me recently with one guy who moderates a group like a despot and has the habit of calling people names. It so happened he is a retired professor. He wanted everybody to agree with him. So, I said b.s. pointblank and continued, I simply don't believe what you are saying. So, what now, do I get an F? He started it. I was just reacting.

    Then he started calling me names. I asked my lawyer to look at the thread, do a timeline (it became a continuing harrassment) and evaluate the possibility of punitive damages. He said the guy cannot even hide behind the First Amendment as there is prima facie evidence of libel. I sued for the heck of it and as an exemplary exercise for his elk.

    To push the issue, I also said I would google myself and every thread that shows up is one count of libel. Until now, he is still hiding.

  • Pissing people off cuts against the grain for me. I guess I could take the usual banter but when people (that you don't even know from Adam or Eve) starts calling you names, unprintable ones, I call my lawyer.

    This happened to me recently with one guy who moderates a group like a despot and has the habit of calling people names. It so happened he is a retired professor. He wanted everybody to agree with him. So, I said b.s. pointblank and continued, I simply don't believe what you are saying. So, what now, do I get an F? He started it. I was just reacting.

    Then he started calling me names. I asked my lawyer to look at the thread, do a timeline (it became a continuing harrassment) and evaluate the possibility of punitive damages. He said the guy cannot even hide behind the First Amendment as there is prima facie evidence of libel. I sued for the heck of it and as an exemplary exercise for his elk.

    To push the issue, I also said I would google myself and every thread that shows up is one count of libel. Until now, he is still hiding.

  • Pissing people off cuts against the grain for me. I guess I could take the usual banter but when people (that you don't even know from Adam or Eve) starts calling you names, unprintable ones, I call my lawyer.

    This happened to me recently with one guy who moderates a group like a despot and has the habit of calling people names. It so happened he is a retired professor. He wanted everybody to agree with him. So, I said b.s. pointblank and continued, I simply don't believe what you are saying. So, what now, do I get an F? He started it. I was just reacting.

    Then he started calling me names. I asked my lawyer to look at the thread, do a timeline (it became a continuing harrassment) and evaluate the possibility of punitive damages. He said the guy cannot even hide behind the First Amendment as there is prima facie evidence of libel. I sued for the heck of it and as an exemplary exercise for his elk.

    To push the issue, I also said I would google myself and every thread that shows up is one count of libel. Until now, he is still hiding.

  • Pissing people off cuts against the grain for me. I guess I could take the usual banter but when people (that you don't even know from Adam or Eve) starts calling you names, unprintable ones, I call my lawyer.

    This happened to me recently with one guy who moderates a group like a despot and has the habit of calling people names. It so happened he is a retired professor. He wanted everybody to agree with him. So, I said b.s. pointblank and continued, I simply don't believe what you are saying. So, what now, do I get an F? He started it. I was just reacting.

    Then he started calling me names. I asked my lawyer to look at the thread, do a timeline (it became a continuing harrassment) and evaluate the possibility of punitive damages. He said the guy cannot even hide behind the First Amendment as there is prima facie evidence of libel. I sued for the heck of it and as an exemplary exercise for his elk.

    To push the issue, I also said I would google myself and every thread that shows up is one count of libel. Until now, he is still hiding.

  • Pissing people off cuts against the grain for me. I guess I could take the usual banter but when people (that you don't even know from Adam or Eve) starts calling you names, unprintable ones, I call my lawyer.

    This happened to me recently with one guy who moderates a group like a despot and has the habit of calling people names. It so happened he is a retired professor. He wanted everybody to agree with him. So, I said b.s. pointblank and continued, I simply don't believe what you are saying. So, what now, do I get an F? He started it. I was just reacting.

    Then he started calling me names. I asked my lawyer to look at the thread, do a timeline (it became a continuing harrassment) and evaluate the possibility of punitive damages. He said the guy cannot even hide behind the First Amendment as there is prima facie evidence of libel. I sued for the heck of it and as an exemplary exercise for his elk.

    To push the issue, I also said I would google myself and every thread that shows up is one count of libel. Until now, he is still hiding.

  • Pissing people off cuts against the grain for me. I guess I could take the usual banter but when people (that you don't even know from Adam or Eve) starts calling you names, unprintable ones, I call my lawyer.

    This happened to me recently with one guy who moderates a group like a despot and has the habit of calling people names. It so happened he is a retired professor. He wanted everybody to agree with him. So, I said b.s. pointblank and continued, I simply don't believe what you are saying. So, what now, do I get an F? He started it. I was just reacting.

    Then he started calling me names. I asked my lawyer to look at the thread, do a timeline (it became a continuing harrassment) and evaluate the possibility of punitive damages. He said the guy cannot even hide behind the First Amendment as there is prima facie evidence of libel. I sued for the heck of it and as an exemplary exercise for his elk.

    To push the issue, I also said I would google myself and every thread that shows up is one count of libel. Until now, he is still hiding.

  • Pissing people off cuts against the grain for me. I guess I could take the usual banter but when people (that you don't even know from Adam or Eve) starts calling you names, unprintable ones, I call my lawyer.

    This happened to me recently with one guy who moderates a group like a despot and has the habit of calling people names. It so happened he is a retired professor. He wanted everybody to agree with him. So, I said b.s. pointblank and continued, I simply don't believe what you are saying. So, what now, do I get an F? He started it. I was just reacting.

    Then he started calling me names. I asked my lawyer to look at the thread, do a timeline (it became a continuing harrassment) and evaluate the possibility of punitive damages. He said the guy cannot even hide behind the First Amendment as there is prima facie evidence of libel. I sued for the heck of it and as an exemplary exercise for his elk.

    To push the issue, I also said I would google myself and every thread that shows up is one count of libel. Until now, he is still hiding.

  • with others go for the jugular when debating but explaining your points is most favorable to seek more people

  • with others go for the jugular when debating but explaining your points is most favorable to seek more people

  • with others go for the jugular when debating but explaining your points is most favorable to seek more people

  • with others go for the jugular when debating but explaining your points is most favorable to seek more people

  • with others go for the jugular when debating but explaining your points is most favorable to seek more people

  • with others go for the jugular when debating but explaining your points is most favorable to seek more people

  • with others go for the jugular when debating but explaining your points is most favorable to seek more people

  • Pingback: War of the Words: Just Let It Go Already! | Flack Me()

  • Aren't you advocating in favor of grandstanding? It seems as if you are in favor of picking a fight for the sake of a fight and, well, if it doesn't go well – just walk away with a snicker.

    What exactly is the point of finding a statement that can be argued both ways and then lobbing it out there? Shouldn't we all be advocating ideas that we believe in? What's the purpose of “pissing people off”? Sounds like a stunt to increase blog traffic by being rude and argumentative.

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I think there is enough snarkiness and rudeness on the Web without actively soliciting it.

    To me a conversation is an informal exchange of ideas. It's a way to meet and engage with people. Can't we do that without carefully orchestrated plots to piss the other person off? Can't we do that without “eviscerating” each other?

    Just a thought.

  • Aren't you advocating in favor of grandstanding? It seems as if you are in favor of picking a fight for the sake of a fight and, well, if it doesn't go well – just walk away with a snicker.

    What exactly is the point of finding a statement that can be argued both ways and then lobbing it out there? Shouldn't we all be advocating ideas that we believe in? What's the purpose of “pissing people off”? Sounds like a stunt to increase blog traffic by being rude and argumentative.

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I think there is enough snarkiness and rudeness on the Web without actively soliciting it.

    To me a conversation is an informal exchange of ideas. It's a way to meet and engage with people. Can't we do that without carefully orchestrated plots to piss the other person off? Can't we do that without “eviscerating” each other?

    Just a thought.

  • Aren't you advocating in favor of grandstanding? It seems as if you are in favor of picking a fight for the sake of a fight and, well, if it doesn't go well – just walk away with a snicker.

    What exactly is the point of finding a statement that can be argued both ways and then lobbing it out there? Shouldn't we all be advocating ideas that we believe in? What's the purpose of “pissing people off”? Sounds like a stunt to increase blog traffic by being rude and argumentative.

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I think there is enough snarkiness and rudeness on the Web without actively soliciting it.

    To me a conversation is an informal exchange of ideas. It's a way to meet and engage with people. Can't we do that without carefully orchestrated plots to piss the other person off? Can't we do that without “eviscerating” each other?

    Just a thought.

  • Aren't you advocating in favor of grandstanding? It seems as if you are in favor of picking a fight for the sake of a fight and, well, if it doesn't go well – just walk away with a snicker.

    What exactly is the point of finding a statement that can be argued both ways and then lobbing it out there? Shouldn't we all be advocating ideas that we believe in? What's the purpose of “pissing people off”? Sounds like a stunt to increase blog traffic by being rude and argumentative.

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I think there is enough snarkiness and rudeness on the Web without actively soliciting it.

    To me a conversation is an informal exchange of ideas. It's a way to meet and engage with people. Can't we do that without carefully orchestrated plots to piss the other person off? Can't we do that without “eviscerating” each other?

    Just a thought.

  • Aren't you advocating in favor of grandstanding? It seems as if you are in favor of picking a fight for the sake of a fight and, well, if it doesn't go well – just walk away with a snicker.

    What exactly is the point of finding a statement that can be argued both ways and then lobbing it out there? Shouldn't we all be advocating ideas that we believe in? What's the purpose of “pissing people off”? Sounds like a stunt to increase blog traffic by being rude and argumentative.

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I think there is enough snarkiness and rudeness on the Web without actively soliciting it.

    To me a conversation is an informal exchange of ideas. It's a way to meet and engage with people. Can't we do that without carefully orchestrated plots to piss the other person off? Can't we do that without “eviscerating” each other?

    Just a thought.

  • Aren't you advocating in favor of grandstanding? It seems as if you are in favor of picking a fight for the sake of a fight and, well, if it doesn't go well – just walk away with a snicker.

    What exactly is the point of finding a statement that can be argued both ways and then lobbing it out there? Shouldn't we all be advocating ideas that we believe in? What's the purpose of “pissing people off”? Sounds like a stunt to increase blog traffic by being rude and argumentative.

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I think there is enough snarkiness and rudeness on the Web without actively soliciting it.

    To me a conversation is an informal exchange of ideas. It's a way to meet and engage with people. Can't we do that without carefully orchestrated plots to piss the other person off? Can't we do that without “eviscerating” each other?

    Just a thought.

  • Aren't you advocating in favor of grandstanding? It seems as if you are in favor of picking a fight for the sake of a fight and, well, if it doesn't go well – just walk away with a snicker.

    What exactly is the point of finding a statement that can be argued both ways and then lobbing it out there? Shouldn't we all be advocating ideas that we believe in? What's the purpose of “pissing people off”? Sounds like a stunt to increase blog traffic by being rude and argumentative.

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I think there is enough snarkiness and rudeness on the Web without actively soliciting it.

    To me a conversation is an informal exchange of ideas. It's a way to meet and engage with people. Can't we do that without carefully orchestrated plots to piss the other person off? Can't we do that without “eviscerating” each other?

    Just a thought.

    • I'm just having fun with it. I don't take any of it very seriously (and I don't look at it as grandstanding). Getting attention is easy, maintaining it is another story entirely.

      Not everyone is as forward thinking as you are George. Most just run and gun and do stuff to deliberately grab attention (sometimes through not so nice means). This is merely an attempt to have fun with that concept and expand on it a bit.

      It is fun to destroy a weak argument though. Not going to lie about that.

      • Hi Stuart:
        Hard to argue against the “I'm only kidding around” defense. That sounds suspiciously like a duck and cover strategy for your own weak argument :-) I will give you merit points for trying to have fun though.

  • Would it piss you off if I pointed out that Killing Me Softly was a Roberta Flack song LONG before the Fugees? Perhaps not…would it piss you off if I told you that I knew full well everyone else had already pointed it out in the comments, but said it anyway? Getting any closer to the jugular there? ;)

  • Would it piss you off if I pointed out that Killing Me Softly was a Roberta Flack song LONG before the Fugees? Perhaps not…would it piss you off if I told you that I knew full well everyone else had already pointed it out in the comments, but said it anyway? Getting any closer to the jugular there? ;)

  • Would it piss you off if I pointed out that Killing Me Softly was a Roberta Flack song LONG before the Fugees? Perhaps not…would it piss you off if I told you that I knew full well everyone else had already pointed it out in the comments, but said it anyway? Getting any closer to the jugular there? ;)

  • Would it piss you off if I pointed out that Killing Me Softly was a Roberta Flack song LONG before the Fugees? Perhaps not…would it piss you off if I told you that I knew full well everyone else had already pointed it out in the comments, but said it anyway? Getting any closer to the jugular there? ;)

  • Would it piss you off if I pointed out that Killing Me Softly was a Roberta Flack song LONG before the Fugees? Perhaps not…would it piss you off if I told you that I knew full well everyone else had already pointed it out in the comments, but said it anyway? Getting any closer to the jugular there? ;)

  • Would it piss you off if I pointed out that Killing Me Softly was a Roberta Flack song LONG before the Fugees? Perhaps not…would it piss you off if I told you that I knew full well everyone else had already pointed it out in the comments, but said it anyway? Getting any closer to the jugular there? ;)

  • Would it piss you off if I pointed out that Killing Me Softly was a Roberta Flack song LONG before the Fugees? Perhaps not…would it piss you off if I told you that I knew full well everyone else had already pointed it out in the comments, but said it anyway? Getting any closer to the jugular there? ;)

  • *bloody brilliant
    (need manicure on that unrelated note, too)

  • *bloody brilliant
    (need manicure on that unrelated note, too)

  • *bloody brilliant
    (need manicure on that unrelated note, too)

  • *bloody brilliant
    (need manicure on that unrelated note, too)

  • *bloody brilliant
    (need manicure on that unrelated note, too)

  • *bloody brilliant
    (need manicure on that unrelated note, too)

  • haha, that's blood brilliant! Nice to know someone else thinks like me…

    “Pwn smartly.” 'ere 'ere to that!

    side note — roberta flack was the original — wyclef, while a favourite of Obama, and his crew aren't the originals :-)

  • haha, that's blood brilliant! Nice to know someone else thinks like me…

    “Pwn smartly.” 'ere 'ere to that!

    side note — roberta flack was the original — wyclef, while a favourite of Obama, and his crew aren't the originals :-)

  • haha, that's blood brilliant! Nice to know someone else thinks like me…

    “Pwn smartly.” 'ere 'ere to that!

    side note — roberta flack was the original — wyclef, while a favourite of Obama, and his crew aren't the originals :-)

  • haha, that's blood brilliant! Nice to know someone else thinks like me…

    “Pwn smartly.” 'ere 'ere to that!

    side note — roberta flack was the original — wyclef, while a favourite of Obama, and his crew aren't the originals :-)

  • haha, that's blood brilliant! Nice to know someone else thinks like me…

    “Pwn smartly.” 'ere 'ere to that!

    side note — roberta flack was the original — wyclef, while a favourite of Obama, and his crew aren't the originals :-)

  • haha, that's blood brilliant! Nice to know someone else thinks like me…

    “Pwn smartly.” 'ere 'ere to that!

    side note — roberta flack was the original — wyclef, while a favourite of Obama, and his crew aren't the originals :-)

  • haha, that's blood brilliant! Nice to know someone else thinks like me…

    “Pwn smartly.” 'ere 'ere to that!

    side note — roberta flack was the original — wyclef, while a favourite of Obama, and his crew aren't the originals :-)

    • *bloody brilliant
      (need manicure on that unrelated note, too)

  • Yana

    Squeaky wheel gets the oil!
    There is a fine line between persistent and pushy, but persistence does pay off!

  • Yana

    Squeaky wheel gets the oil!
    There is a fine line between persistent and pushy, but persistence does pay off!

  • Yana

    Squeaky wheel gets the oil!
    There is a fine line between persistent and pushy, but persistence does pay off!

  • Yana

    Squeaky wheel gets the oil!
    There is a fine line between persistent and pushy, but persistence does pay off!

  • Yana

    Squeaky wheel gets the oil!
    There is a fine line between persistent and pushy, but persistence does pay off!

  • Yana

    Squeaky wheel gets the oil!
    There is a fine line between persistent and pushy, but persistence does pay off!

  • Yana

    Squeaky wheel gets the oil!
    There is a fine line between persistent and pushy, but persistence does pay off!

  • See my comment to Vernicus below :). (And yes 1971 was 14 years before I was born).

  • See my comment to Vernicus below :). (And yes 1971 was 14 years before I was born).

  • See my comment to Vernicus below :). (And yes 1971 was 14 years before I was born).

  • See my comment to Vernicus below :). (And yes 1971 was 14 years before I was born).

  • See my comment to Vernicus below :). (And yes 1971 was 14 years before I was born).

  • See my comment to Vernicus below :). (And yes 1971 was 14 years before I was born).

  • Steve

    I like your blog a lot. However, who the hell are the Fugees? Roberta Flack sang that song in 1971, probably back before you were born.
    Someone I saw posted that “Happy Trails” was by Van Halen. Guess they never heard of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. It bugs me when people give credit to the wrong folks!

  • Steve

    I like your blog a lot. However, who the hell are the Fugees? Roberta Flack sang that song in 1971, probably back before you were born.
    Someone I saw posted that “Happy Trails” was by Van Halen. Guess they never heard of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. It bugs me when people give credit to the wrong folks!

  • Steve

    I like your blog a lot. However, who the hell are the Fugees? Roberta Flack sang that song in 1971, probably back before you were born.
    Someone I saw posted that “Happy Trails” was by Van Halen. Guess they never heard of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. It bugs me when people give credit to the wrong folks!

  • Steve

    I like your blog a lot. However, who the hell are the Fugees? Roberta Flack sang that song in 1971, probably back before you were born.
    Someone I saw posted that “Happy Trails” was by Van Halen. Guess they never heard of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. It bugs me when people give credit to the wrong folks!

  • Steve

    I like your blog a lot. However, who the hell are the Fugees? Roberta Flack sang that song in 1971, probably back before you were born.
    Someone I saw posted that “Happy Trails” was by Van Halen. Guess they never heard of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. It bugs me when people give credit to the wrong folks!

  • Steve

    I like your blog a lot. However, who the hell are the Fugees? Roberta Flack sang that song in 1971, probably back before you were born.
    Someone I saw posted that “Happy Trails” was by Van Halen. Guess they never heard of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. It bugs me when people give credit to the wrong folks!

  • Steve

    I like your blog a lot. However, who the hell are the Fugees? Roberta Flack sang that song in 1971, probably back before you were born.
    Someone I saw posted that “Happy Trails” was by Van Halen. Guess they never heard of Roy Rogers and Dale Evans. It bugs me when people give credit to the wrong folks!

    • See my comment to Vernicus below :). (And yes 1971 was 14 years before I was born).

  • Humility is great for relationship building. Mainly because it establishes that both parties are rational individuals. Knowing when to shut up is pretty cool.

  • Humility is great for relationship building. Mainly because it establishes that both parties are rational individuals. Knowing when to shut up is pretty cool.

  • Humility is great for relationship building. Mainly because it establishes that both parties are rational individuals. Knowing when to shut up is pretty cool.

  • Humility is great for relationship building. Mainly because it establishes that both parties are rational individuals. Knowing when to shut up is pretty cool.

  • Humility is great for relationship building. Mainly because it establishes that both parties are rational individuals. Knowing when to shut up is pretty cool.

  • Humility is great for relationship building. Mainly because it establishes that both parties are rational individuals. Knowing when to shut up is pretty cool.

  • Bingo ;). I did originally think that the Fugee's had written the song but through an edit discovered that they hadn't (and Roberta had). Thankfully an older editor called me on it (thanks Amy Vernon) but I decided to leave it in there because it fit more with my cultural sensibilities. (I'm 24)

  • Bingo ;). I did originally think that the Fugee's had written the song but through an edit discovered that they hadn't (and Roberta had). Thankfully an older editor called me on it (thanks Amy Vernon) but I decided to leave it in there because it fit more with my cultural sensibilities. (I'm 24)

  • Bingo ;). I did originally think that the Fugee's had written the song but through an edit discovered that they hadn't (and Roberta had). Thankfully an older editor called me on it (thanks Amy Vernon) but I decided to leave it in there because it fit more with my cultural sensibilities. (I'm 24)

  • Bingo ;). I did originally think that the Fugee's had written the song but through an edit discovered that they hadn't (and Roberta had). Thankfully an older editor called me on it (thanks Amy Vernon) but I decided to leave it in there because it fit more with my cultural sensibilities. (I'm 24)

  • Bingo ;). I did originally think that the Fugee's had written the song but through an edit discovered that they hadn't (and Roberta had). Thankfully an older editor called me on it (thanks Amy Vernon) but I decided to leave it in there because it fit more with my cultural sensibilities. (I'm 24)

  • Bingo ;). I did originally think that the Fugee's had written the song but through an edit discovered that they hadn't (and Roberta had). Thankfully an older editor called me on it (thanks Amy Vernon) but I decided to leave it in there because it fit more with my cultural sensibilities. (I'm 24)

  • Vernicus

    Whether she's relevant or not, it's painful that you think the Fugees named that song: it's a cover of a Roberta Flack song. That kinda undermines your point about thinking carefully about your points….unless you planned this to illustrate your “circumstantial deviation” point. ;-)

  • Vernicus

    Whether she's relevant or not, it's painful that you think the Fugees named that song: it's a cover of a Roberta Flack song. That kinda undermines your point about thinking carefully about your points….unless you planned this to illustrate your “circumstantial deviation” point. ;-)

  • Vernicus

    Whether she's relevant or not, it's painful that you think the Fugees named that song: it's a cover of a Roberta Flack song. That kinda undermines your point about thinking carefully about your points….unless you planned this to illustrate your “circumstantial deviation” point. ;-)

  • Vernicus

    Whether she's relevant or not, it's painful that you think the Fugees named that song: it's a cover of a Roberta Flack song. That kinda undermines your point about thinking carefully about your points….unless you planned this to illustrate your “circumstantial deviation” point. ;-)

  • Vernicus

    Whether she's relevant or not, it's painful that you think the Fugees named that song: it's a cover of a Roberta Flack song. That kinda undermines your point about thinking carefully about your points….unless you planned this to illustrate your “circumstantial deviation” point. ;-)

  • Vernicus

    Whether she's relevant or not, it's painful that you think the Fugees named that song: it's a cover of a Roberta Flack song. That kinda undermines your point about thinking carefully about your points….unless you planned this to illustrate your “circumstantial deviation” point. ;-)

  • Pingback: cum sa enervezi lumea si sa te iubeasca totusi pentru asta « Blogul de Relatii Publice()

  • Lauryn Hill is still relevant right? I mean she's crazy…but still an awesome performer ;)

  • Lauryn Hill is still relevant right? I mean she's crazy…but still an awesome performer ;)

  • Lauryn Hill is still relevant right? I mean she's crazy…but still an awesome performer ;)

  • Lauryn Hill is still relevant right? I mean she's crazy…but still an awesome performer ;)

  • Lauryn Hill is still relevant right? I mean she's crazy…but still an awesome performer ;)

  • Lauryn Hill is still relevant right? I mean she's crazy…but still an awesome performer ;)

  • #7 is crucial. We all make mistakes and get called out on it sometimes. Having enough sense to know when you've effed up and it's time to move on is crucial. Humility is a good thing.

    “Pwn smartly.”

    Wise words, wise words.

  • #7 is crucial. We all make mistakes and get called out on it sometimes. Having enough sense to know when you've effed up and it's time to move on is crucial. Humility is a good thing.

    “Pwn smartly.”

    Wise words, wise words.

  • #7 is crucial. We all make mistakes and get called out on it sometimes. Having enough sense to know when you've effed up and it's time to move on is crucial. Humility is a good thing.

    “Pwn smartly.”

    Wise words, wise words.

  • #7 is crucial. We all make mistakes and get called out on it sometimes. Having enough sense to know when you've effed up and it's time to move on is crucial. Humility is a good thing.

    “Pwn smartly.”

    Wise words, wise words.

  • #7 is crucial. We all make mistakes and get called out on it sometimes. Having enough sense to know when you've effed up and it's time to move on is crucial. Humility is a good thing.

    “Pwn smartly.”

    Wise words, wise words.

  • #7 is crucial. We all make mistakes and get called out on it sometimes. Having enough sense to know when you've effed up and it's time to move on is crucial. Humility is a good thing.

    “Pwn smartly.”

    Wise words, wise words.

  • #7 is crucial. We all make mistakes and get called out on it sometimes. Having enough sense to know when you've effed up and it's time to move on is crucial. Humility is a good thing.

    “Pwn smartly.”

    Wise words, wise words.

    • Humility is great for relationship building. Mainly because it establishes that both parties are rational individuals. Knowing when to shut up is pretty cool.

  • Good article. The Fugees though? lol

  • Good article. The Fugees though? lol

  • Good article. The Fugees though? lol

  • Good article. The Fugees though? lol

  • Good article. The Fugees though? lol

  • Good article. The Fugees though? lol

  • Good article. The Fugees though? lol

    • Lauryn Hill is still relevant right? I mean she's crazy…but still an awesome performer ;)

      • Vernicus

        Whether she's relevant or not, it's painful that you think the Fugees named that song: it's a cover of a Roberta Flack song. That kinda undermines your point about thinking carefully about your points….unless you planned this to illustrate your “circumstantial deviation” point. ;-)

        • Bingo ;). I did originally think that the Fugee's had written the song but through an edit discovered that they hadn't (and Roberta had). Thankfully an older editor called me on it (thanks Amy Vernon) but I decided to leave it in there because it fit more with my cultural sensibilities. (I'm 24)

          • Vincent E Solon

            Thanks for the tip Stuart Foster. I work in escalations for sears store. I think this might be helpful. It does diminish your credibility by not giving the amazing Grammy Award winning Artist Areatha Franklin that created the words for the Fugee’s to use. Brovo for giving credit where credit is due after about 3 mentions of this fact. Good topic.