Come On You Don't Really Buy This Crap Do You?

I know you're out there.  You are saying to yourself:

"Gee, one things leads to another, that's interesting. Not." 

"Come on Herb, this is just mental masturbation.  Another way to spin an old concept."

"In case you missed it, people have realized for centuries that 'We're all Connected.'"

"I'm playing along Herb, but there's not much meat on the bun.  It's "neat" but please don't convince yourself that it's something more."

"Herb is full of shit and Domino Theory is a bunch of crap."  [That one is for the search engines.  I hope they pick that up.  I didn't use the f*ck word despite seeing how powerful that is for my friend Brad Feld's blog.]

"Sure, buying dinner for a stranger is nice thing to do, but do you really expect that to lead to some big "movement."  Get real."

"Great concept, I think, but you really haven't fully caught my attention yet.  Maybe that's because there's 'no there there'."

I'm sure I missed a few.  Let's hear it!  Quit being so damn nice.  I'm trying to do something good here, and I know for a fact that this means that many people would like nothing better than to poke at me.

My commenting software on the blog site is called "Intense Debate."  Let's give it a workout.

Comments

[Michael Birdsong]

Herb, I most definitely buy into your idea of the Domino Theory. I think a lot of other people do too.

I also sadly believe that a lot of people are held back by the ideas that "Sacrifice, risk and/or involvement are best made, taken, and/or engaged in by somebody else."

All it takes is one or a couple of crazy activists to get the movement, chain reaction, or ball rolling. Not every effort results in even modest success, and as you've said, that scares people. Too many folks want guaranteed success, reward, or recognition; and that ain't the way the world as ever worked.

It takes folks like you to remind, encourage and even goad people into getting up off their fannies and actually caring to teh point of action. Count me in Herb, I'm with you. :-)

[Laura Olinger]

I become skeptical when the receipt of a domino obligates someone to continue it. A lot depends on the circumstances or context in which it is given:

If the domino comes with obligation attached to it, all is lost. If it comes with joy, possibility, and the true spirit of giving, then the recipient feels like it is their lucky day, and wants to participate. You just have to attach the right energy to each of the dominoes.

And the context in which it is received: If it does nothing but sit in someone's pocket, on their desk or dresser, and inspires them to work harder til they can afford to pay it forward, or make a donation and pass it along, then it may have done more for that one person and their family than the domino that has passed through the hands of 5 do-gooders in succession. Those are the stories that we may never hear, or at least we have to wait for.

[D. A.]

- So far, domino theory sounds like a slightly different spin on concepts that are already out there. That being said, that's how I feel about a lot of business-related bestsellers out there -- the same thing, looked at in a slightly different way. Except yours has dominoes.

- It reuses an existing name, albeit a post-WWII one from the political realm (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory). How unique/different is it? It's also not too far off from the butterfly effect idea (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect).

- So far, the "topple" ideas put forth in the blog strike me as a little elite for a movement that could do something like fight poverty. Buying dinner for someone who's already at a restaurant (and hence can already afford it), Latte it Forward @ Starbucks, meeting Bono.... Those might all be nice gestures, but how much do they affect the underprivileged of the world? Put another way, how many generations would it take before any of these topples affects the underprivileged?

- You really oughta address the whole topple/tople thing.

[Herb Morreale]

Michael,

It's funny, I don't like to think of myself as an activist, but I understand the point. I'm really not trying to get people "off their fannies," but rather inspire people to see that there are ways to think about things that make it easier to have the courage to take an action.

You're comment is very helpful to me in that it makes me think about what it means to be (or not to be) an "activist." I'll keep thinking on that.

[Herb Morreale]

Laura,

I totally agree, it all depends on the context in which you ask someone to become part of a topple. In Domino Theory, each Topple has it's own purpose. To bring people into the topple they need to "buy in". You can shove a domino at them, but it don't go anywhere if they feel "sold to."

That said, I don't feel that the "obligation" part is all bad. As we've discussed, when looking at Domino Theory as having a line of product, obligation isn't the right strategy. But in a more general context, if you as someone (like a friend) to help with something, it's normal for them to feel obligated to some extent. How many of us have given money to some walk-a-thon because we felt obligated. Is that all bad?

Even being more bold, creating guilt around not passing something on is a fine strategy for keeping a topple moving. It might not be the "nicest" way to do things, but if a huge topple was in motion and came to a halt because someone didn't take action, I think most people would say that that person, "Hey, look at this big thing you're messing up."

By no means am I saying that Domino Theory relies on obligation and guilt to get one domino knock over another, but it is a valid strategy.

[Herb Morreale]

D.A.,

Nice. Thanks for the critique. A few things:

I think Domino Theory does sound like other things out there, and I'm honestly asking myself all the time what different. It's OK if its just packaging because we all ingest information in different ways. However, I'm not trying to just package it, I'm looking for unique aspects, fully knowing that nothing is truly unique. Maybe said another way, the core concepts probably will never be unique, but maybe the integration of them is.

I'm concerned about the post-WWII Domino Theory connection. Not sure what to do about that except rename my theory, or try to "rebrand" an old concept. I'm leaning to the later. If this took off for some crazy reason, I would love to see you visit wikipedia and find the disambiguation.

I 90% agree the topples are "elite." However, that's probably a reflection me more than the concept. The part where I don't agree is Topple #0000002 (Buy Dinner for a Stranger). I will be making a post about this shortly, so stay tuned on a complete reply to your comments about "hence they can afford it."

Topple vs. Tople. OK, here's the thing. Everything in Domino Theory will be Two 'P'. However, the problem I currently have is that topplers.com is not available. I just registered topplers.us. Not excited about that, but it might be a step in the right direction.

[michael birdsong]

Herb,

I do see you as an activist, as you are taking steps to "inspire people to see that there are ways to think about things that make it easier to have the courage to take an action."

As to the idea about "obligation" to get things done, I feel that is completely appropriate. I've been involved long enough in non-profit activities and fundraising to see that some of the some affluent people I know are some of the most stingy.

Let's face it, we have common acquaintances who send out a couple of e-mails, make a couple of phone calls and have a combined donation of 'six figures' ready to contribute within a single work day, and these founds could basically come out of 'the pocket change' of the parties in question.

Laura,

Too many people just don't care, and I think 'obligation and guilt' are sometimes acceptable 'first motivators'. If these reluctant givers see the return and appreciation for the gift they gave or the action they took, then I believe the other, and better, motivators of "joy, possibility, and the true spirit of giving" will keep them in the process of causing more toples.

"D.A.",
I'll start my response to you with a quote from one of the closing lines of one of my all time favorite movies.

"In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so." -- Anton Ego in 'Ratatouille'

Who's to say the party that got a 'paid for' dinner or Starbucks coffee drink would not immediately go by a place like the EFAA here in Boulder on their way home, see that EFAA needed 'tuna fish' for the food bank that day, run by the grocery, grab a case of it, and return to EFAA and donate it? That be a tople of ONE and about 0.00057% of a generation (assuming a 'generation' is 20 years and it took an hour for the party to donate the case of tuna).

You can ask those people (who are in the position most able to give) for donations or assistance repeated times, and never get a thing out of the effort, ever. You can ask someone on limited budget retirement benefits for a little assistance and get cash equivalent to a one week's worth of their monthly grocery budget. I have seen it happen myself repeatedly. I have also seen people donate a very generous amount because they could easily afford it, and want no mention of the amount donated ever made.

Bono at least cares. Among so many others, "The Google Triplets" of Brin, Page and Schmidt, only seem to care about earning even more money and spending it in truly obscene ways.

You never know where an idea like this will inspire people to act to make the world a better place, but just pointing out hypothetical shortfalls in the theory really does not contribute anything to the discussion.

Okay, I'll get off my soap box now.

[Herb Morreale]

Michael,

I appreciate what you trying to say to D.A., but I really did ask for people to take shots Domino Theory. I'm at a stage where even negative feedback (which I didn't take D.A.s as) is helpful because it makes me think about what I can do to make my thoughts more clear, and/or learn that there's somewhere else I can turn for more information (i.e. your stuff is just like xx).

So, everyone, keep the comments coming. This is great. Don't worry about being too critical. And Michael, don't worry, I'll keep believing anyways :-)

[D. A.]

Herb, thanks for your post. It echoes some of what I would have said had you not said it.

Michael-

As Herb pointed out, he asked for critical feedback (from the original post- "Quit being so damn nice!"), so I gave it. None of my feedback was nearly as critical as Herb's examples. My intent was to provide honest feedback about shortcomings to Domino Theory that I've noticed in reading this blog.

It is entirely possible that paying for someone's meal or coffee will inspire them to do good. It is also entirely possible that it will inspire nothing in them. That wasn't my point. My comments come primarily from the perspective of what it might take to turn something like Domino Theory from a "hobby" to a more effective, useful movement. If its strategies, or even its creator, are perceived as elitist, that limits its potential.

Also, a clarifying point -- when I referred to "generations", I was referring to Herb's definition of generation in the context of Domino Theory (see http://yoherb.typepad.com/domino/2008/04/working-on-the.html) not a human generation.

[Michael Birdsong]

D.A. and Herb,

Apologies for my misunderstanding, and rechanneled annoyance. You both are correct.

I feel there has been enough "navel gazing" (and hyper-extension of elbows as people pat themselves on the back for minimal action) among the 'Web 2.0' crowd in general (and in this geographic region in particular). I vented that frustration here, improperly.

Time for discussion and debate is over. We need to get to the 'design, develop and do' stage.

[Herb Morreale]

D.A. and anyone else following along...

Is there a difference between being "elite" and "self indulgent"? What best captures the criticisms?

[D. A.]

Herb-

I see a difference between being elite vs self-indulgent. My interpretation of your earlier comment is that the elitism I perceived was a result of your self-indulgence -- self-indulgence was the "cause" so to speak, elitism the effect.

Your goal to meet Bono strikes me as more explicitly self-indulgent, but I saw other topples as being elite independent of that one. So for my criticism, elite still feels more accurate. Hope that helps.

[Herb Morreale]

D.A.

I've taken some heat for the Bono topple. But I think that's because it's a bit misunderstood. I wanted to create an experiment where I tried to tip a big domino by pushing over some smaller ones. So, as I thought about who would be a big domino, I came up with Bono because I respect his work around poverty and aids. But, I admit, it looks like "I want to meet Bono" vs. "Let me show everyone an example of a small domino tipping a big one."

I'm reading "The Last Lecture." It's made me think a lot about self indulgence.

[Laura Olinger]

I agree that obligation and guilt can be extremely effective first-time motivators. No doubt. However, if "compelling" and "inspiring" are consistently kept in the formula, you'll have a much greater return on subsequent generations, and repeat topplers.

Yes, in the high-income brackets go for it from any angle, they can take it. Use guilt and obligation to the hilt. For those less fortunate, where the monetary commitment is more precious, you won't get to round #2, thus making it more elite by creating a faster decay rate due to socioeconomics...what are you up to anyway?

Paying attention to this in your design will make a difference, I promise.