Worlds Collide Ep. 3 - Parties, Rap & BS (live Friday, 11/1/19 @ 8pm East) *fan alert msg*

Thats just cuz defcon 1.


Defcon 1.5 or 2, we'd get callers. I'm just not there yet. I was asked by a lot of people to bring this thing back and finally did...but this time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy. More engagement I guess, even though it's not really preferred that way, we did get anywhere between 4 and 15 callers an episode.

Ive got about 3 episodes left in me for USMB before we scrap it here and take it to real life friends, fam and advertising. When we do that, we unfortunately wont be able to let most usmb know because real lives = private, from here. This isnt about "success," its about hanging for a couple hrs a week for fun.

We also get a lot of "dang, i didnt know!" so I was going to try alerting ppl but I wanted their consent first but ... nobody read the OP.
Whose fault is it that itā€™s defcon 1?
Mine, I just articulated that. I've purposely avoided what I know gets us more engagement. I'll give it a few more shots b4 peacing out.
That wasnā€™t what I was asking.

Why does it have to be defcon 1?
That's JUST a name I've given to my effort...it doesn't have to be anything at all.
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
 
Whose fault is it that itā€™s defcon 1?
Mine, I just articulated that. I've purposely avoided what I know gets us more engagement. I'll give it a few more shots b4 peacing out.
That wasnā€™t what I was asking.

Why does it have to be defcon 1?
That's JUST a name I've given to my effort...it doesn't have to be anything at all.
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
 
Mine, I just articulated that. I've purposely avoided what I know gets us more engagement. I'll give it a few more shots b4 peacing out.
That wasnā€™t what I was asking.

Why does it have to be defcon 1?
That's JUST a name I've given to my effort...it doesn't have to be anything at all.
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
 
That wasnā€™t what I was asking.

Why does it have to be defcon 1?
That's JUST a name I've given to my effort...it doesn't have to be anything at all.
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
I see. So you donā€™t believe that you and LoneLaugherā€™s online behaviors have anything to do with people not calling in?
 
That's JUST a name I've given to my effort...it doesn't have to be anything at all.
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
I see. So you donā€™t believe that you and LoneLaugherā€™s online behaviors have anything to do with people not calling in?
If they did, the people who actually did call as opposed to the ones that did the shitting probably wouldn't have mentioned bringing the show back so many times. I didn't start the program to generate interest. The interest was generated, and then I started the program. I got PMs and comments all of the time to bring it back.
 
That wasnā€™t what I was asking.

Why does it have to be defcon 1?
That's JUST a name I've given to my effort...it doesn't have to be anything at all.
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
You do realize that you are arguing that the so called haters kept people from calling in when you had previously argued that you would have had more callers calling in if you had promoted it in the other threads, right?
 
That's JUST a name I've given to my effort...it doesn't have to be anything at all.
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
You do realize that you are arguing that the so called haters kept people from calling in when you had previously argued that you would have had more callers calling in if you had promoted it in the other threads, right?
I'm not arguing that the haters kept anyone from calling in.

I argued the exact opposite, so this was a weird post.
 
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
I see. So you donā€™t believe that you and LoneLaugherā€™s online behaviors have anything to do with people not calling in?
If they did, the people who actually did call as opposed to the ones that did the shitting probably wouldn't have mentioned bringing the show back so many times. I didn't start the program to generate interest. The interest was generated, and then I started the program. I got PMs and comments all of the time to bring it back.
What I am trying to bring out is that more people didnā€™t call in because they didnā€™t trust you guys to be professional when they respectfully presented an opposing view.

And my question is whose fault is that?
 
Defcon 1 means war. You donā€™t promote it because you donā€™t want war on the podcast.

Right?
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
You do realize that you are arguing that the so called haters kept people from calling in when you had previously argued that you would have had more callers calling in if you had promoted it in the other threads, right?
I'm not arguing that the haters kept anyone from calling in.

I argued the exact opposite, so this was a weird post.
Itā€™s not but I donā€™t think I will ever be able to convince you otherwise.
 
Ding you seem super confused and I already know the bone you're picking. We are poopy heads to some folks at USMB and therefore those folks don't call? Something like that...am I right?

I am not at all even 1% concerned with that, or any callers - this isn't about popularity or success. It's something people have had fun with, and its here again for a limited time and back by demand. If it doesn't work out, I'll feel the same as the day before it didn't work out.

If I wanted some popular online podcast, I wouldnt do it from usmb, lol...that should be obvious.
 
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
I see. So you donā€™t believe that you and LoneLaugherā€™s online behaviors have anything to do with people not calling in?
If they did, the people who actually did call as opposed to the ones that did the shitting probably wouldn't have mentioned bringing the show back so many times. I didn't start the program to generate interest. The interest was generated, and then I started the program. I got PMs and comments all of the time to bring it back.
What I am trying to bring out is that more people didnā€™t call in because they didnā€™t trust you guys to be professional when they respectfully presented an opposing view.

And my question is whose fault is that?
We have a great track record with our callers...so I don't care to be honest. No skin off my back.
 
Ding you seem super confused and I already know the bone you're picking. We are poopy heads to some folks at USMB and therefore those folks don't call? Something like that...am I right?

I am not at all even 1% concerned with that, or any callers - this isn't about popularity or success. It's something people have had fun with, and its here again for a limited time and back by demand. If it doesn't work out, I'll feel the same as the day before it didn't work out.

If I wanted some popular online podcast, I wouldnt do it from usmb, lol...that should be obvious.
Iā€™m not picking a bone. Iā€™m asking questions.
 
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
I see. So you donā€™t believe that you and LoneLaugherā€™s online behaviors have anything to do with people not calling in?
If they did, the people who actually did call as opposed to the ones that did the shitting probably wouldn't have mentioned bringing the show back so many times. I didn't start the program to generate interest. The interest was generated, and then I started the program. I got PMs and comments all of the time to bring it back.
What I am trying to bring out is that more people didnā€™t call in because they didnā€™t trust you guys to be professional when they respectfully presented an opposing view.

And my question is whose fault is that?
We have a great track record with our callers...so I don't care to be honest. No skin off my back.
You should always care to be honest.

Honesty = Genuine
 
Ding you seem super confused and I already know the bone you're picking. We are poopy heads to some folks at USMB and therefore those folks don't call? Something like that...am I right?

I am not at all even 1% concerned with that, or any callers - this isn't about popularity or success. It's something people have had fun with, and its here again for a limited time and back by demand. If it doesn't work out, I'll feel the same as the day before it didn't work out.

If I wanted some popular online podcast, I wouldnt do it from usmb, lol...that should be obvious.
Iā€™m not picking a bone. Iā€™m asking questions.
Thats fair.

To be clear...the goal is fun, not callers...not behaving in x, y z manor and not popularity.

If LL likes to bust chops with folks and thats his fun, Im good with it.

My fun is chillin with him and having a couple of drinks. I like the fella...and Im not worried about any internet butthurts I mighta caused causing any certain person not to call..lol, the fakk. Thats their choice, cool by me. For the other 30something people that have always called...we are all pretty much cordial to date. Even a few hyper partisans have called and outright expressed how their experience was a pleasant surprise. I like doing that, too.
 
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
I see. So you donā€™t believe that you and LoneLaugherā€™s online behaviors have anything to do with people not calling in?
If they did, the people who actually did call as opposed to the ones that did the shitting probably wouldn't have mentioned bringing the show back so many times. I didn't start the program to generate interest. The interest was generated, and then I started the program. I got PMs and comments all of the time to bring it back.
What I am trying to bring out is that more people didnā€™t call in because they didnā€™t trust you guys to be professional when they respectfully presented an opposing view.

And my question is whose fault is that?
We have a great track record with our callers...so I don't care to be honest. No skin off my back.
You should always care to be honest.

Honesty = Genuine
Not what I meant.
 
I was using defcon 1 in a proprietary way meaning "lowest-effort level of garnering engagement," not in the colloquial way meaning war.

I don't even know what war on the podcast means. We've had many charged debates on there in the past, it's never been an issue.
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
I see. So you donā€™t believe that you and LoneLaugherā€™s online behaviors have anything to do with people not calling in?
If they did, the people who actually did call as opposed to the ones that did the shitting probably wouldn't have mentioned bringing the show back so many times. I didn't start the program to generate interest. The interest was generated, and then I started the program. I got PMs and comments all of the time to bring it back.
What I am trying to bring out is that more people didnā€™t call in because they didnā€™t trust you guys to be professional when they respectfully presented an opposing view.

And my question is whose fault is that?

Beating a dead horse jesus chriust are you callin in next time or what?
 
Ding you seem super confused and I already know the bone you're picking. We are poopy heads to some folks at USMB and therefore those folks don't call? Something like that...am I right?

I am not at all even 1% concerned with that, or any callers - this isn't about popularity or success. It's something people have had fun with, and its here again for a limited time and back by demand. If it doesn't work out, I'll feel the same as the day before it didn't work out.

If I wanted some popular online podcast, I wouldnt do it from usmb, lol...that should be obvious.
Iā€™m not picking a bone. Iā€™m asking questions.
Thats fair.

To be clear...the goal is fun, not callers...not behaving in x, y z manor and not popularity.

If LL likes to bust chops with folks and thats his fun, Im good with it.

My fun is chillin with him and having a couple of drinks. I like the fella...and Im not worried about any internet butthurts I mighta caused causing any certain person not to call..lol, the fakk. Thats their choice, cool by me. For the other 30something people that have always called...we are all pretty much cordial to date. Even a few hyper partisans have called and outright expressed how their experience was a pleasant surprise. I like doing that, too.

Its fun I was too drunk to call. ALso wanted to hear others call.
 
Ding you seem super confused and I already know the bone you're picking. We are poopy heads to some folks at USMB and therefore those folks don't call? Something like that...am I right?

I am not at all even 1% concerned with that, or any callers - this isn't about popularity or success. It's something people have had fun with, and its here again for a limited time and back by demand. If it doesn't work out, I'll feel the same as the day before it didn't work out.

If I wanted some popular online podcast, I wouldnt do it from usmb, lol...that should be obvious.
Iā€™m not picking a bone. Iā€™m asking questions.
Thats fair.

To be clear...the goal is fun, not callers...not behaving in x, y z manor and not popularity.

If LL likes to bust chops with folks and thats his fun, Im good with it.

My fun is chillin with him and having a couple of drinks. I like the fella...and Im not worried about any internet butthurts I mighta caused causing any certain person not to call..lol, the fakk. Thats their choice, cool by me. For the other 30something people that have always called...we are all pretty much cordial to date. Even a few hyper partisans have called and outright expressed how their experience was a pleasant surprise. I like doing that, too.

Its fun I was too drunk to call. ALso wanted to hear others call.
I'll think of a theme for the next one and go ahead and post it in the hater zone so that the dark fury/dopey creeper crew can shit all over it and give it free bumps.

If that doesnt work after a couple of times...I can easily pack up the u-haul and move the program elsewhere, and youll def be linked in private. : )
 
Ding you seem super confused and I already know the bone you're picking. We are poopy heads to some folks at USMB and therefore those folks don't call? Something like that...am I right?

I am not at all even 1% concerned with that, or any callers - this isn't about popularity or success. It's something people have had fun with, and its here again for a limited time and back by demand. If it doesn't work out, I'll feel the same as the day before it didn't work out.

If I wanted some popular online podcast, I wouldnt do it from usmb, lol...that should be obvious.
Iā€™m not picking a bone. Iā€™m asking questions.
Thats fair.

To be clear...the goal is fun, not callers...not behaving in x, y z manor and not popularity.

If LL likes to bust chops with folks and thats his fun, Im good with it.

My fun is chillin with him and having a couple of drinks. I like the fella...and Im not worried about any internet butthurts I mighta caused causing any certain person not to call..lol, the fakk. Thats their choice, cool by me. For the other 30something people that have always called...we are all pretty much cordial to date. Even a few hyper partisans have called and outright expressed how their experience was a pleasant surprise. I like doing that, too.

Its fun I was too drunk to call. ALso wanted to hear others call.
I'll think of a theme for the next one and go ahead and post it in the hater zone so that the dark fury/dopey creeper crew can shit all over it and give it free bumps.

If that doesnt work after a couple of times...I can easily pack up the u-haul and move the program elsewhere, and youll def be linked in private. : )

Perhaps a swan song show before moving on to things that can actually promote your creativity.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: GT
You wrote, ā€œthis time I tried the approach of posting it strictly in its correct forum as opposed to getting a buzz by warring with haters and posting it in the Flame Zone. Seems like warring with haters and then just being ourselves on air was a better remedy.ā€œ

Right?

So clearly you thought there would be confrontation if certain callers called in.

Right?

My question is why does it have to be that way? Who is responsible for it being that way?
No, you're mis-reading me.

The haters weren't the callers.

The haters kept the threads bumped by shitting all over the show, and the interest their hatred created caused the callers, who were different people altogether than the folks actually doing the hating.
I see. So you donā€™t believe that you and LoneLaugherā€™s online behaviors have anything to do with people not calling in?
If they did, the people who actually did call as opposed to the ones that did the shitting probably wouldn't have mentioned bringing the show back so many times. I didn't start the program to generate interest. The interest was generated, and then I started the program. I got PMs and comments all of the time to bring it back.
What I am trying to bring out is that more people didnā€™t call in because they didnā€™t trust you guys to be professional when they respectfully presented an opposing view.

And my question is whose fault is that?

Beating a dead horse jesus chriust are you callin in next time or what?
Not sure. Thatā€™s what Iā€™m trying to figure out.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top