IEEE Consultants' Network of Long Island

How to Not Ruin A Lecture - John Dunn, Consultant, Ambertec, P.E., P.C.

Consider these three case studies. Perhaps we can learn how to not to ruin a lecture.

 

Case 1: Have you ever heard of the term "QSB"?  In ham radio lingo, it refers to ionospheric fading.

The other day, I heard this lawyer speaking at seminar. He said many interesting things. He spoke well, he spoke clearly and so his presentation was very much worth the time.

Then his partner took over. For the next half hour, I could not understand one single concept this second fellow was trying to put forth. This is no exaggeration. It was the utter perfection of this experience that made it so memorable.  

Most lawyers have good diction, but this second presenter did not. As he went on, it seemed that every tenth to twentieth word, there would emerge a sound which I have to assume was a part of the English language vocabulary, but what word it might have actually been, I simply could not discern. He would repeatedly turn himself back and forth at the lectern, first facing the audience and then facing away, back and forth, back and forth again and when facing away from the audience and the microphone, his voice faded away (QSB) to being almost inaudible.

Of course, the obligatory Powerpoint was in use and up on screen came this very carefully constructed and wonderfully instructive bar chart. It had a horizontal axis, a vertical axis and some isometrically drawn vertical blocks of all different colors and heights. There was writing everywhere. Some letters placed horizontally, some were placed vertically, some were placed at 45 degrees and not one single letter of all of that was legible.

 

Case 2:  Have you ever thought about what else makes something readable and what does not?

At a different recent seminar, an engineering tutorial this time, Powerpoint was also in use. In this case, there were lots of key words and phrases placed inside of darkly shaded and colored rectangles. Most of them I could not read because the colors and shadings were so dark that the lettering could just barely be seen. There was nowhere near enough contrast.

This same speaker also used quite a lot of unfamiliar acronyms and techno-jargon. Some of what the acronyms meant I was able to discern from their context, but many of them I could not.

 

Case 3:  Have you ever contemplated the stupefying effects of extreme monotony?

I was at this third lecture where, yes, Powerpoint was in use. The lecturer put up this one slide in which there were perhaps half a dozen bulleted lines. Then he began his narration and continued and continued and continued and continued and ...... and in all of that time, that one single slide remained up there on the screen. It was up there for about thirty of the longest minutes I can recall to memory. I could see people starting to squirm and fidget. That speaker lost a good part of his audience due to intense visual boredom.

Suggested viewing:  http://www.volacci.com/marketing-news/5-steps-compelling-visual-content

Summary:  Speak clearly, speak to your audience and do be thoughtful about the visuals.

LinkedIn, Libel and Quality Control Filters

From: John Dunn [mailto:jdunn4@optonline.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 2:48 PM
To: 'LinkedIn Customer Support'
Cc: steve.taranovich@ubm.com; Suzanne Deffree (suzanne.deffree@ubm.com)
Subject: RE: Group Access [Ticket: 130522-002656]

Betsy, this is precisely my complaint, the statement that “This action can’t be reversed by us.”  I do not and I will not accept this position on the part of LinkedIn.

This is not only improper, it constitutes LinkedIn’s commission of a business fraud under the mantle of so-called “quality control filters”.

I have submitted almost three-hundred blog essays to The IEEE Consultants Network of Long Island, to EDN Magazine’s column Analog Developments, to Planet Analog and to EE Times, essays that have received many replies of reader approval. mostly through LinkedIn itself. Among the fifty groups (not eight) to which my access has been blocked, there is approximately a readership of forty-thousand persons.

I am aware of being banned at several groups other than the fifty above in response to technical commentary that I had offered. In one case as it comes to mind, my commentary was about the downside of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology in which I cited references to previously published literature.

The present situation was triggered by one miscreant, one Anthony Esposito, who improperly accused me to LinkedIn of “spamming”. I have since been given to know that he did not mean his harm, but harm me he did.

Again, I cannot and I will not accept this situation and I require its correction.

John Dunn

The Earth Is Flat - John Dunn, Consultant, Ambertec, P.E., P.C.

Please consider this collection of statements:

The earth is flat. The world is six thousand years old. Evolution is only a theory. There is no such thing as global warming. No man has ever walked on the moon. Rock and roll causes juvenile delinquency. Reading in the dark will make you go blind. Vaccines cause autism. Ike and Dick will surely click. Just a little bit won't hurt you.

In the course of my six decades plus on the surface of this orb, each of these and many other pearls of information and opinion have actually been advanced to me by one person or another as being either a provable or a proven fact.

I submit that none of them either are or were.

The "little bit" referred to above has been offered to me with regard to arsenic, atomic test fallout, x-rays, any number of food preservatives and so forth. To me, having heard these factoids⁽¹⁾ offered in dead earnest has sometimes felt like living in "The Strange World of Mr. Mum".

By the way, just in case you're not familiar with Mr. Mum, please see:  Mr. Mum

The impregnable attitudes that underlie the thinking of those who would put these statements out there for public consumption have no apparent remedy. Sadly, those least qualified by either education or experience often seem to be the most strident and shrill purporters and they are also often the most likely to acquire an ardent following.

 ⁽¹⁾ From dictionary.com:

Factoid: Something fictitious or unsubstantiated that is presented as fact, devised especially to gain publicity and accepted because of constant repetition.

LinkedIn, Libel and A Worsening Situation - John Dunn, Consultant, Ambertec, P.E., P.C.

From: John Dunn [mailto:jdunn4@optonline.net] On Behalf Of ambertec@ieee.org
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 9:52 PM
To: 'LinkedIn Customer Support'
Cc: steve.taranovich@ubm.com; Mary Winch; Members LICN
Subject: LinkedIn Group Access Restrictions

I have a problem with access to any LinkedIn group. It has been the case for going onto a month, but it is even a worse problem than I have heretofore realized.

In late March, I was libeled to LinkedIn by one Anthony Esposito who accused me of being a “spammer”. LinkedIn responded punitively against me without making any inquiry regarding that false accusation by blocking my proper access to all fifty groups of which I was a member.

Every posting I make, every reply I offer, needs to be reviewed by a group manager before being allowed to appear on line. The result is that I have been effectively muzzled. The postings backlogs, the Pending Submissions, have become substantial.

So far, working with those group managers who have been cooperative (Not all of them have been.), I have been restored to eighteen groups out of the fifty. However, this group shown below is totally new to me and yet I discover that my access there too is restricted.

 

I have just now become a member of this group and yet I find I am muzzled, just as with the fifty groups to which I had belonged at the outset of this situation.

Clearly, my basic LinkedIn profile has been corrupted. It is irrelevant which group I may choose to contact.

I have learned that the way each group manager is to do group restoration for me is as follows:

 

1.    The manager must go to the group page and click on the Manage tab.

2.    In the Manage Group column (left side), click on Submission Queue.

3.    Select John Dunn (place check mark near name)

4.    Click on Change Permissions button in upper, right corner.

5.    In drop-down menu, select Approved to Post.

 

Unfortunately, this process does NOT remedy the fundamental problem of my corrupted LinkedIn profile.

That corruption problem can only be corrected by LinkedIn itself and that is what needs to be done.

John Dunn

516-378-0979

LinkedIn, Libel and the State of California Department of Justice

Improper Business Practice of LinkedIn Corporation, 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043-4655

Text of complaint submitted to 

http://oag.ca.gov/contact/consumer-complaint-against-business-or-company

I am a subscriber to LinkedIn. Recently, I was falsely accused to LinkedIn by another subscriber of being a "spammer" to which LinkedIn responded punitively against me while making no inquiry whatever before doing so.

I am now denied access to paid for services while I continue to be charged for them.

Although LinkedIn has by e-mail admitted its error, I note the line "I can understand your frustration and I’m sorry for the inconvenience." in their message to me of April 1st, they absolutely refuse to make the necessary and appropriate correction of their error.

E-mail messages have been exchanged over this, but LinkedIn has now gone silent. As of this writing, LinkedIn refuses to reply further to me on the topic while remaining adamant in having stated that they cannot, read that as "will not", make correction.

I submit that LinkedIn's action constitutes the commission of internet fraud by their offering of services that they refuse to deliver while continuing to bill for them.

LinkedIn, Libel and The Federal Communications Commission

I have now filed a formal complaint to The Federal Communications Commission against LinkedIn Corporation regarding the internet troll situation and the libel that has been committed against me.

Improper Business Practice of LinkedIn Corporation, 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043-4655  

 

Tel:  1-650-687-3600    

Text of complaint submitted to  https://esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/form2000.action?form_type=2000B

 

I am a subscriber to LinkedIn. Recently, I was falsely accused to LinkedIn by another subscriber of being a "spammer" to which LinkedIn responded punitively against me while making no inquiry whatever before doing so.

I am now denied access to paid for services while I continue to be charged for them.

Although LinkedIn has by e-mail admitted its error, note the line "I can understand your frustration and I’m sorry for the inconvenience." in their message to me of April 1st, they absolutely refuse to make the necessary and appropriate correction of their error.

E-mail messages have been exchanged over this, but LinkedIn has now gone silent. As of this writing, LinkedIn refuses to reply further to me on the topic while remaining adamant in having stated that they cannot, read that as "will not", make correction.

I submit that LinkedIn's action constitutes the commission of internet fraud by their offering of services that they refuse to deliver while continuing to bill for them.

LinkedIn, Libel and The Federal Trade Commission

I have now filed a formal complaint to The Federal Trade Commission against LinkedIn Corporation regarding the internet troll situation and the libel that has been committed against me.

Improper Business Practice of LinkedIn Corporation, 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043-4655

Tel: 1-650-687-3600

I have been a subscriber to LinkedIn for several years. Recently, I was falsely accused to LinkedIn by another subscriber of being a "spammer" to which LinkedIn immediately responded punitively and improperly against me while making no inquiry whatever before doing so.

As a result, I have been denied my access to paid for LinkedIn services while I am continuing to be charged for them.

Although LinkedIn has by e-mail admitted its error, note the line "I can understand your frustration and I’m sorry for the inconvenience." in their message to me of April 1st, they absolutely refuse to make the necessary and appropriate correction of their error.

The messages shown below are some of the e-mail messages that have been exchanged on this matter. However, LinkedIn has now gone silent to me. As of this writing, LinkedIn refuses to reply further to me on the topic while remaining adamant in having stated that they cannot, read that as "will not", make correction.

I submit that LinkedIn's action constitutes a commission of fraud, an offering of services that they refuse to deliver while continuing to bill for them.

While recognizing, as written on your web site at https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/, that "The FTC does not resolve individual consumer complaints.", I still wish to request that your agency's attention be directed to this matter for such actions as you may deem appropriate.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Yours truly,

John Dunn

===============================================================================

From: John Dunn [mailto:jdunn4@optonline.net]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 6:09 PM
To: 'LinkedIn Customer Support'
Cc: steve.taranovich@ubm.com
Subject: RE: Postings [Ticket: 130328-005182]

Zach -

You still insist on positing an absurdity.

One single miscreant chose to accuse me of spamming and then conveyed that accusation to LinkedIn. In response, LinkedIn chose to immediately inflict punishment on me with no investigatory inquiry of any kind. It is not even remotely possible that fifty group managers would all at once, in unison, have suddenly decided to harm me. That harm was inflicted on me at a keystroke by LinkedIn itself.

The claim that LinkedIn is "unable to remove this restriction" is belied by the fact that LinkedIn imposed this restriction. LinkedIn does indeed have control over this matter but has so far refused to use that control to make what has already been agreed would be a proper and justified correction.

Again then: How and when will LinkedIn rectify this? Am I expected to continue paying my good money for such markedly diminished LinkedIn service? Am I to simply accept having effectively had my mouth shut by LinkedIn's complicity with one accusatory miscreant?

John Dunn

LinkedIn Customer Support Message
Subject: Postings
Hi John, Thank you for your feedback on the posting restriction in your groups. Unfortunately, I'm unable to remove this restriction for you on any of your groups. As we've previously stated, each group's management has the ability to make you an approved poster and make your posts go into the group without needing approval. I’ve sent your comments on the restriction to our product development team for review. Although they can’t personally respond to all feedback, they do track and consider members’ suggestions. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to reply back to me. Best regards, Zach Groups Support Specialist
Recent Discussion History:
Member Comment: John Dunn	04/13/2013 08:50
Zach - What you have written below is utterly bizarre. The damage that took one sociopathic person a mere heartbeat to inflict would by your suggestion, take me weeks if not months repair. It is not an acceptable situation. A reasonable remedy is required! John Dunn
LinkedIn Response	04/01/2013 08:35
Hi John, I can understand your frustration and I’m sorry for the inconvenience. However, something in your recent posting behavior caused you to be blocked and removed by the management of a specific group. As such, this block and removal triggered a quality control filter which puts all of your posts up for approval in each group you currently belong to. The group managers in each group can approve your posts individually or change your status back to "Approved to post" for their group. We leave this decision in their hands and we will not be able to lift your posting permissions in all of your groups. We suggest that each group's management team review pending submissions on a weekly basis, but this is really up to each group's owner and managers. We don't interfere or participate in the group's approval and denial process for pending submissions, and we don't provide groups with any approval requirements. I'd encourage you to take the following steps to see if a group manager is open to be contacted: 1. Click "Groups" at the top of your homepage. 2. Locate the group where your membership is pending approval, and click "Send message". 3. Type your message and click "Send Message". If you speak to a Group manager and they're not sure how to lift your posting permissions, please have them contact us for further assistance on a separate support ticket. Thank you for your patience and cooperation. Best regards, Zach Groups Support Specialist
Original Contact:
Member Comment: John Dunn	03/28/2013 12:35
As of this morning, I find that every posting I try to make to the various groups is blocked for review. Why is this so? For several months, I have been harassed by "Anthony", an internet troll who has followed me from group to group and posted all manner of nasty and inappropriate commentary in reply to almost every topic. Is there a connection there?