oooh...removed. Now I can throw these "collector" episodes on ebay for $millionzzz. Here it comes...now the filtration has begun. I mean..69 was controversial but this is nothing new at pf.net
With what Nick is going through couldn't we all throw him a "get out of jail free card" here? He apologized--he was tired and said things he shouldn't have. Nuff said.
My wife always reminds me--"think it, don't say it" :)
I prefer in these instances to say--"do you ever say something that you think might not ought to have said?....I never do..."
Good luck with your new responsibilities Nick--I guess PF will have to go 2.0 a bit too if it shall continue and not perish into podcast vapor.
Nick's own words from Coffeegeek; Rule 1: Don't besmirch other coffee companies or baristas.
I'll share my story. I was on another discussion board (not coffee-focused) just a few months ago, and someone recommended that I go to a particular roaster/retailer for barista training. I immediately took offense at this, especially thinking back to just a year prior, when I was in one of this same roaster/retailer's shops and saw (and consumed) what was an utter lack of barista training. On that discussion board, I responded with something like, "Well, to be honest, that company doesn't really get much respect within the specialty coffee industry."
What followed frankly caught me off guard. I was lambasted as being a shill for my business and told that I was being very offensive because this roaster is very successful and has a great reputation in its chosen market. A conversation with one of the people active in that discussion board further drove the point home: In a public forum, I insulted not only the roaster in question, but everyone who buys and loves their coffee.
At the time, I was puzzled. EVERYONE on the Internet talks crap about everything, don't they? Isn't part of the discussion always gonna be criticism and critique?
Perhaps. But not among professionals.
Dictionary.com says:
be•smirch 1 To stain; sully: a reputation that was besmirched by slander. 2 To make dirty; soil.
I've learned my lesson. Frankly, I never thought of myself as having such standing in the culinary or coffee community that anyone would care what I wrote on some discussion board out there in cyberspace. Either way, I was wrong.
Don't besmirch other coffee companies or other baristas. It is simply unprofessional. It only serves to cause divisiveness in our coffee community, when what we need is unity. If someone in earshot happens to love that coffee you just said sucks, it either makes them feel dumb, or it makes YOU look dumb. Don't ever assume that your words won't ever hurt the coffee company in question.
And before you go asking about exceptions to the rule, yes, that goes for the big multinational chains too.
So what CAN you say? You can certainly talk about what you've been taught, or what you've read, or what your opinions about coffee are. We're intelligent people, right? We know how to be diplomatic about how we say things. Baristas, never forget your role as a "coffee ambassador." You know already that you know much more about coffee than the average person, and the same thing that makes your statements about good espresso have weight in the general public is the same thing that makes your statements about "how much the roaster down the street sucks" damaging.
Wield your portafilter with care. If not, you might hurt someone... especially yourself.
ITALICS MINE
The excerpt above is why I can't "throw Nick a bone", especially since he is in a position of power and responsibility, not just a part-timer from some podunk village, USA.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and comments regarding this issue. While there has been much discussion, it's time for that discussion to end since Podcast #69 (and #67) have been censored by the Specialty Coffee Association of America.
This is the New World Order.
Thank you for your membership, now stop thinking for yourself and recite the Party Line...
Don't we all listen to Nick and Jays podcast because of their passion and intensity for the world of coffee? Nick and Jay aren't always politically correct, but I don't think many of us would listen to them if they were. We're listening to guys who open up with a Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre song and follow that up with a bold form of coffee entertainment; it's not NPR. We listen to laugh, learn, argue and be a part of the coffee community, it's fun. Nick shouldn't have said the things that he did, and he apologized. So how about everyone get over it? Bottom line, everyone knows what they're getting into when they tune in.
Jay, The SCAA didn't actually remove the show did they? They asked for it to be removed and, I assume, Nick chose to remove it. Who is the censor here? PF.net was lobbied by the SCAA and chose to act on their behalf. At least that's what it seems like without knowing any more about the actual contact between the SCAA and PF.net.
#69 was fun; guys don't you ever hold back. It provided me **much needed** timely coverage of the expo in your intimatable RAW and REAL style. The "issues" covered were relevant and everyone's positions/ comments are respected. Nice BALANCED show in the PF.net styleee.
A look at the scaa website didn't cross post to pf.net. Altho I don't agree or understand what Nick said about Tatiana, he made it very clear that it was not a personal attack. I guess the pf podcasts are no longer independent and this gives the scaa an even worse reputation from us consumers.
oooh...removed. Now I can throw these "collector" episodes on ebay for $millionzzz.
ReplyDeleteHere it comes...now the filtration has begun. I mean..69 was controversial but this is nothing new at pf.net
With what Nick is going through couldn't we all throw him a "get out of jail free card" here? He apologized--he was tired and said things he shouldn't have. Nuff said.
My wife always reminds me--"think it, don't say it" :)
I prefer in these instances to say--"do you ever say something that you think might not ought to have said?....I never do..."
Good luck with your new responsibilities Nick--I guess PF will have to go 2.0 a bit too if it shall continue and not perish into podcast vapor.
Nick's own words from Coffeegeek;
ReplyDeleteRule 1: Don't besmirch other coffee companies or baristas.
I'll share my story. I was on another discussion board (not coffee-focused) just a few months ago, and someone recommended that I go to a particular roaster/retailer for barista training. I immediately took offense at this, especially thinking back to just a year prior, when I was in one of this same roaster/retailer's shops and saw (and consumed) what was an utter lack of barista training. On that discussion board, I responded with something like, "Well, to be honest, that company doesn't really get much respect within the specialty coffee industry."
What followed frankly caught me off guard. I was lambasted as being a shill for my business and told that I was being very offensive because this roaster is very successful and has a great reputation in its chosen market. A conversation with one of the people active in that discussion board further drove the point home: In a public forum, I insulted not only the roaster in question, but everyone who buys and loves their coffee.
At the time, I was puzzled. EVERYONE on the Internet talks crap about everything, don't they? Isn't part of the discussion always gonna be criticism and critique?
Perhaps. But not among professionals.
Dictionary.com says:
be•smirch
1 To stain; sully: a reputation that was besmirched by slander.
2 To make dirty; soil.
I've learned my lesson. Frankly, I never thought of myself as having such standing in the culinary or coffee community that anyone would care what I wrote on some discussion board out there in cyberspace. Either way, I was wrong.
Don't besmirch other coffee companies or other baristas. It is simply unprofessional. It only serves to cause divisiveness in our coffee community, when what we need is unity. If someone in earshot happens to love that coffee you just said sucks, it either makes them feel dumb, or it makes YOU look dumb. Don't ever assume that your words won't ever hurt the coffee company in question.
And before you go asking about exceptions to the rule, yes, that goes for the big multinational chains too.
So what CAN you say? You can certainly talk about what you've been taught, or what you've read, or what your opinions about coffee are. We're intelligent people, right? We know how to be diplomatic about how we say things. Baristas, never forget your role as a "coffee ambassador." You know already that you know much more about coffee than the average person, and the same thing that makes your statements about good espresso have weight in the general public is the same thing that makes your statements about "how much the roaster down the street sucks" damaging.
Wield your portafilter with care. If not, you might hurt someone... especially yourself.
ITALICS MINE
The excerpt above is why I can't "throw Nick a bone", especially since he is in a position of power and responsibility, not just a part-timer from some podunk village, USA.
Jonathan-
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing your thoughts and comments regarding this issue. While there has been much discussion, it's time for that discussion to end since Podcast #69 (and #67) have been censored by the Specialty Coffee Association of America.
This is the New World Order.
Thank you for your membership, now stop thinking for yourself and recite the Party Line...
Don't we all listen to Nick and Jays podcast because of their passion and intensity for the world of coffee? Nick and Jay aren't always politically correct, but I don't think many of us would listen to them if they were. We're listening to guys who open up with a Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre song and follow that up with a bold form of coffee entertainment; it's not NPR. We listen to laugh, learn, argue and be a part of the coffee community, it's fun. Nick shouldn't have said the things that he did, and he apologized. So how about everyone get over it? Bottom line, everyone knows what they're getting into when they tune in.
ReplyDeleteJay,
ReplyDeleteThe SCAA didn't actually remove the show did they? They asked for it to be removed and, I assume, Nick chose to remove it. Who is the censor here? PF.net was lobbied by the SCAA and chose to act on their behalf. At least that's what it seems like without knowing any more about the actual contact between the SCAA and PF.net.
just for laughs...
ReplyDeleteJay- does this mean you plan to burn your freshly-printed SCAA membership card on youtube in protest?
I assume the issue the SCAA had was with comments made by a board member.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Jay needs to do future podcasts with, uh, Rick Cho
censorship is awesome.
ReplyDeleteself-censorship is even better.
#69 was fun; guys don't you ever hold back. It provided me **much needed** timely coverage of the expo in your intimatable RAW and REAL style. The "issues" covered were relevant and everyone's positions/ comments are respected. Nice BALANCED show in the PF.net styleee.
ReplyDeleteA look at the scaa website didn't cross post to pf.net. Altho I don't agree or understand what Nick said about Tatiana, he made it very clear that it was not a personal attack. I guess the pf podcasts are no longer independent and this gives the scaa an even worse reputation from us consumers.
ReplyDeleteMarvin
I guess the SCAA is still about as transparent as murky coffee. :-(
ReplyDeleteLove the irony of an anonymous poster bitchin' about transparency....
ReplyDeleteOh and "H" is transparent...
ReplyDeleteH=Humberto
ReplyDeleteThanks for interesting article.
ReplyDeleteGlad to read articles like this. Thanks to author!
ReplyDeleteExcellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!
ReplyDeleteT83IaW You have a talant! Write more!
ReplyDeleteGiurwJ Good job!
ReplyDeleteJMkIYU The best blog you have!
ReplyDeletejKKMwA Magnific!
ReplyDeletePlease write anything else!
ReplyDeletePlease write anything else!
ReplyDeleteThanks to author.
ReplyDeleteGood job!
ReplyDeleteNice Article.
ReplyDeleteHello all!
ReplyDeleteWonderful blog.
ReplyDeleteNice Article.
ReplyDeletezMV14o write more, thanks.
ReplyDeleteHello all!
ReplyDeleteWonderful blog.
ReplyDeleteactually, that's brilliant. Thank you. I'm going to pass that on to a couple of people.
ReplyDeleteMagnific!
ReplyDeleteNice Article.
ReplyDeleteHello all!
ReplyDeleteWonderful blog.
ReplyDeleteGood job!
ReplyDeleteMagnific!
ReplyDeleteHello all!
ReplyDeleteHello all!
ReplyDeleteLottery: A tax on people who are bad at math.
ReplyDeleteChange is inevitable, except from a vending machine.
ReplyDeleteAll generalizations are false, including this one.
ReplyDeleteBuild a watch in 179 easy steps - by C. Forsberg.
ReplyDeleteGive me ambiguity or give me something else.
ReplyDelete