Yesterday I shared the shot I fired over the bow of Maggie Lang, Senior Director of Loyalty & Relationship Marketing at Kimpton Hotels & Restaurants.
And she replied:
Hi David,
Thanks for the opportunity to respond. I completely agree with you; I
should know the number of duplicitous campaigns and if I chose to wait a
few days I could have gotten a closer count. However, I thought it more
important to apologize quickly while any potential frustration might
still be fresh.
I can imagine that it’s frustrating receiving emails from us if you
don’t recall subscribing. We only email subscribers who have opted in
for our emails. Would you like to unsubscribe?
Finally, at the risk of multiple semi-colon violations … I hear you; our
voice is a little different than that of most companies and it may not
be for everyone. As for the love? Well, we do love our members and we
hope they love us back. We try to earn their business every day and if
an exclamation mark in an email helps underscore that sentiment from
time to time, we’re willing to take that risk.
All my best,
Maggie
I replied,
Maggie, thanks for responding.
All is forgiven—except the exclamation points, which are the cheapest way imaginable to demonstrate “love”—and your cheapening of “love.” Do we have to add to the dictionary definition, “5. The way a retail corporation feels about every random Tom, Dick and Harry who has ever stumbled into one of its retail operations and handed it money and been dragooned into joining its ‘loyalty program.’ ”
Thanks again for the conversation. But please do unsubscribe me.
Love,
David
Readers: Was I too hard on Maggie in my first post? Too easy on her in my second? On my bad trip through the "duplicitous" corporate communication industrial park, help me find the path to rationality. (And tomorrow I'll tell you how Lang and I ended the conversation.) —DM
You may have missed an opportunity to explain to her that “duplicitous” does not mean the same thing as “duplicate”. Or did she reveal more than she meant to?
Semi-literacy is more dangerous than illiteracy.
David, Maggie will never get it unless you write in language she understands. Try something like this: “OMG, Maggie, WTF, seriously? Like, how many times will u msg me these F*ing dups? Unfriending!”
Or something to that effect. Use that nimble mind of yours where it’s appreciated. That certainly won’t be emailing Maggie. Blogging to your fans, now, that’s ALWAYS a good bet.
PS: congrats on the move, which must be a good thing or you wouldn’t have done it. Miss you! (Did I tell you it already SNOWED here? last weekend. Where’s all this global warming we keep hearing about? I guess warm places must get warmer and cold places get colder, or some such thing.)
I dont think your reply to her had anywhere near enough exclamation marks…
And while we’re at it, since vocal chords are not involved, can an e-mail really have a ‘voice’? Tone, yes, but ‘voice’?
If so, if one is nervous when writing an email, does that turn its ‘voice’ into a vibrato?
@Joan: As my conclusion to this epic will touch upon, I prefer Maggie’s callow enthusiasm to the cold corporate shit we used to have to deal with. “General Motors believes ….” But companies treating us like BFFs is condescending in its own way. Now bundle up, my Alaskan Demographic.
@Jeff: Writing “voice” has become a standard term. It’s figurative … but do you think it’s barbaric?
In her world, ‘voice’ has become a standard term the same way exclamation points have, apparently, become a standard punctuation mark. I dont find ‘voice’ to be barbaric but I might consider it Hanna-Barberic.
I kind of like my voice … hold on: !!!! Thanks for a fun exchange, David. And yes, lesson learned. I shall be more mindful of the curmudgeons and voice police out there. Not. I’m going to skip back into my happy place right now and lick my wounds.
Personally, I think you came off like an over-educated and obnoxious d-bag, who knows how to write (somewhat) and is trying to overshadow some of his own shortcomings by pointing out shortcomings of others. This woman (which I’m sure is also a part of you problem) is heading up a major business unit at a larger US corporation and she’s out there doing her thing – transparently. Sure, you might not like how she talks or the words she uses, but she puts her name on all that she does and she is accountable. The fact she responded to you personally, and it seems like commented here as “Maggie L”, is a testament to that. I’m not saying that you were completely wrong here, but how you carried on and attacked her might have been.
Bonozoffa:
Part of being accountable means dealing with over-educated and obnoxious d-bags.
And part of knowing how to write (somewhat) means backing up assertions, like “trying to overshadow some of his own shortcomings by pointing out shortcomings of others.” Is this a specific theory about me, or a blanket theory about anyone who criticizes anyone else?
I like Maggie’s transparency and willingness to engage, as I say in Part Three of this post. It’s just that a person who’s paid to communicate on behalf of a company, to an a well-heeled audience of over-educated d-bags, as you would probably call them, must be more than enthusiastic. She must be literate, too.
says who? right, the over-educated and obnoxious d-bags out there today. i’m all for using proper grammar – although mine is admittedly horrible – but there are those out there who’s grammar and use of words are far more egregious than what this was.
as for my shortcomings assertion, it is actually geared to the masses out there today, as this is absolutely the case w/ the far majority who do this kind of ranting on their personal blogs. but in looking at your previous posts (including the “part three” that I admittedly missed – i’m not a fan of typepad b/t/w), you seem to be guilty of it – although much less so than the masses, admittedly.
so with that, i take my leave of your blog, provide this last comment to help you “find the path to rationality”, and wish you good day/god speed/good luck…and hope you think before you angrily blog next time about a small/non-item s/a this.
“Term used to describe anyone with enough time or narcissism to document every tedious bit of minutia filling their uneventful lives. Possibly the most annoying thing about bloggers is the sense of self-importance they get after even the most modest of publicity. Sometimes it takes as little as a referral on a more popular blogger’s website to set the lesser blogger’s ego into orbit. ” -Urban Dictionary
John, it sounds like you have some things you’d like to get off your chest. May I suggest starting a blog?
upvc doors
Writing Boots: Loyalty
1 month loan
Writing Boots: Loyalty
1 month loan
Writing Boots: Loyalty
1 month loan
Writing Boots: Loyalty
1 month loan
Writing Boots: Loyalty
presentation
Writing Boots: Loyalty
best payday loans
Writing Boots: Loyalty