Things that annoy you beyond reason...(Vol 5)
Discussion
bristolracer said:
Get a real job
That's like telling a musician to get a real job. Some "Social Media Influencers" can, and do, make proper money from it - several thousands of pounds per post. And just like any form of advertising, companies will pay for that either in freebies or in actual money. Of course, just like musicians, for every one that earns big bucks there are thousands who make only pennies.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
bristolracer said:
Get a real job
That's like telling a musician to get a real job. Some "Social Media Influencers" can, and do, make proper money from it - several thousands of pounds per post. And just like any form of advertising, companies will pay for that either in freebies or in actual money. Of course, just like musicians, for every one that earns big bucks there are thousands who make only pennies.
Then she has the nerve to go on about how people have had a go at her. Live by the sword, die by the sword
bristolracer said:
Musicians don’t try to blackmail businesses into giving them freebies.
I see it more as offering one's services and saying that payment in kind would be acceptable. I don't read it as an extortion racket of "give me free stuff or I will give you negative press" but "if you would like to give me some free stuff, I can get you some positive press". Plenty of companies ask freelancers to do stuff "for the exposure" (photographers and web developers especially) so I don't see anything wrong with a freelancer offering their services in exchange for non-monetary payment.
Anyway, I'm not denying you your right to be annoyed by a spat between someone offering their services to a business and the business kicking off about it.
Edit:
MartG said:
bristolracer said:
Musicians don’t try to blackmail businesses into giving them freebies.
Usually it's the other way round Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Saturday 20th January 21:12
bristolracer said:
Social media influencers
Like this one
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-42750803
Get a real job
Stupid bint
QuiteLike this one
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-42750803
Get a real job
Stupid bint
jimPH said:
Use of the word 'revert' in an email instead of 'reply'.
I believe this is so widely incorrectly used that the meaning is beginning to change.
Yep - and lawyers - who have no excuse not to communicate clearly - are the biggest offenders.I believe this is so widely incorrectly used that the meaning is beginning to change.
Several times, they have received 'into what?' replies to their emails from me.
jimPH said:
Use of the word 'revert' in an email instead of 'reply'.
I believe this is so widely incorrectly used that the meaning is beginning to change.
During my divorce, my lawyer would use it in the sense of putting the ball back in someone's court. So if she said "I will sort out <whatever> and then revert to you" it meant not only get back to me, but that then I would be the one who had to do something in order to progress I believe this is so widely incorrectly used that the meaning is beginning to change.
BT e-mail webpage
They've now made it so it times out after a while ( presumably to 'enhance' security ), requiring you to log back in
The problem being that when you click on the 'log back in' button it doesn't open the login page in the same browser tab, not even in a new tab - it opens up a complete new browser window
ste programming IMO
They've now made it so it times out after a while ( presumably to 'enhance' security ), requiring you to log back in
The problem being that when you click on the 'log back in' button it doesn't open the login page in the same browser tab, not even in a new tab - it opens up a complete new browser window
ste programming IMO
Clockwork Cupcake said:
jimPH said:
Use of the word 'revert' in an email instead of 'reply'.
I believe this is so widely incorrectly used that the meaning is beginning to change.
During my divorce, my lawyer would use it in the sense of putting the ball back in someone's court. So if she said "I will sort out <whatever> and then revert to you" it meant not only get back to me, but that then I would be the one who had to do something in order to progress I believe this is so widely incorrectly used that the meaning is beginning to change.
To revert means to return to its former condition.
So what she is saying is that she will do a task and then become you; implying she was you.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
bristolracer said:
Musicians don’t try to blackmail businesses into giving them freebies.
I see it more as offering one's services and saying that payment in kind would be acceptable. I don't read it as an extortion racket of "give me free stuff or I will give you negative press" but "if you would like to give me some free stuff, I can get you some positive press". Plenty of companies ask freelancers to do stuff "for the exposure" (photographers and web developers especially) so I don't see anything wrong with a freelancer offering their services in exchange for non-monetary payment.
Anyway, I'm not denying you your right to be annoyed by a spat between someone offering their services to a business and the business kicking off about it.
Edit:
MartG said:
bristolracer said:
Musicians don’t try to blackmail businesses into giving them freebies.
Usually it's the other way round Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Saturday 20th January 21:12
Sorry, I'll drink my saucer of milk quietly...
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff