Saturday, September 24, 2011

They don't make 'em like they used to

We had a spiffy new Carrier gas furnace installed yesterday. It’s quiet, clean, and it’s going to save us a lot of money on heating costs (we hope). But I was very sad to see our old furnace go. She was a Beach oil furnace, built at the old Beach foundry, which was located in the same neighbourhood we live in now.

The furnace was installed when the house was built in 1971/72, and she’s been running ever since. We didn’t replace her because she was broken; but after 39 years of faithful service, we figured she could go at any time.

Switching from oil to gas is a bureaucratic nightmare. There is a lot of coordination with the gas company, the furnace installer, the inspectors, and, in our case, the energy auditor. It took weeks to plan, then we had to wait for the gas line to be installed, and then have the furnace installed. So we had to decide in advance that our old girl’s time was up.

I took a few photos of our old Beach babe. For 39, she still looked pretty good. She was a tad rusty in places, and she started up with a bit of rumble, but she kept us toasty for the past 15 winters.

Apparently, we can expect to get 10, maybe 15, years out of our new furnace.

They sure don’t make ‘em like they used to.




Monday, July 20, 2009

Crossing the Chasm

For almost seventeen years, I have owned a ginger tabby cat named Chester. Anyone who has ever owned a pet for any length of time knows that each animal has its own unique personality and particular idiosyncrasies that can be cute, maddening, or downright annoying – similar to human beings, I guess. Chester is no different. His idiosyncrasy is quite straightforward. For almost seventeen years, he has consistently, persistently, and insistently meowed for most of his waking life (which for cats, thankfully, is only about 20% of the time).

I used to fantasize that perhaps Chester was a handsome prince who had been turned into a cat and was trying to say “get me out of this body!!” If only I knew the spell, I could transform both our lives and live happily ever after! (Although it also occurred to me that, if he were a prince, he’d be way too chatty for me - I prefer the strong, silent type.)

Over the years, I have been able to figure out a few of Chester’s meows and been able, at times, to respond to him in ways that obviously satisfy his needs or wants. But much of what he says remains a mystery. Plain and simple – I don’t speak Cat, and Chester doesn’t speak English. There is a chasm between us that even seventeen years of togetherness can never bridge – we are from two very different branches of the evolutionary tree. I simply don’t know what’s going on in his feline brain.

Many years ago, a friend of mine told me that she thought that human beings really had very little idea about non-human intelligence. She believed that we are only able to project our own view of intelligence onto other species, and thus we render them as less intelligent than we are because they do not measure up to human standards of intelligence. But what if, she asked, they were capable of different but equally highly evolved intelligence that made them successful species, albeit different from us? It was an intriguing thought, especially after two bottles of wine shared over dinner, and it is one that has remained with me ever since.

Michael Pollan’s book, The Botany of Desire, puts forth the thesis that four particular plant species – the apple, the tulip, cannibis, and the potato, have used human desire for their particular charms as a means to profilerate their species. In other words, human beings have been the unwitting foils to the proliferation of these species, and in some cases (such as the Irish potato famine of 1848) collateral damage along the road to the species’ success. While his thesis has the ring of anthropomorphism about it, it does suggest that not only humans and animals have the drive to survive and evolve. Is Pollan onto a form of botanical intelligence – using another species’ desire as a driver to success? We simply don’t know. But scientists are now studying plant “behaviour” and all the related implications that the term implies.

Placing anthropomorphic tendencies on non-human things is an example of how we overlay human, or systems thinking, on everything we observe. But is it possible that our very human thinking is actually limiting our understanding of the world around us? Have we, in fact, shut ourselves off from the rest of the world by operating within very specific and limited processes of thinking, by placing human expectations and standards on living things that we don’t really understand? If this is the case, we may need to change the way we look at things before we can truly understand them.

Will we ever have meaningful communication with another species? It’s difficult to say – it’s possible that the chasms are simply too wide, and that all species are stranded on their own communication islands, humans being no different than any other species. But there are flickers of hope. Anyone who has ever successfully trained a dog to sit or had a peaceful cuddle with their cat, knows that communication between species does happen. Is it possible that we have missed the communication signals that other species have been sending us all along? If you believe that only humans can make the first move in interspecies communication, read this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/magazine/12whales-t.html?ref=magazine.

It may change your way of thinking about other species. And that may be the first step …

Monday, May 18, 2009

Is Television Passé?

For several years, we received cable on our television free of charge, despite our best efforts to regularly complain to the local cable provider. They would promise to look into it, weeks would go by, and we would still have a full 70 channels. 

Last fall, I put my foot down with the cable company and harassed them until they FINALLY pulled the plug. Unfortunately, it happened exactly one week before the 2008 U.S. election, and we had invited a number of friends  to come over to watch the election with us. We had to do something fast or it would be a quiet evening.

As it turned out, November 4 was a night of joy. We had invited our friends over, ostensibly to watch "the end of the Bush era," but what we were really hoping for was the chance to celebrate the victory of Barack Obama. The gathering was a cross-section of generations, nationalities, men, women, friends and family come together to watch an historical event. But aside from the politically significant aspects of the evening, there was also a more subtle historical shift occurring that night.

Since we had no television, I had to rig up a media centre from which we could monitor the election results. I brought my MacBook downstairs from my home office. Relying on our wireless modem, and using a second monitor I lugged upstairs from my husband's home office in the basement, we were able to watch two different Web sites - cnn.com's live action news, and CNN's interactive Web site showing electoral returns from across the various states. 

While the evening was all about Obama, upon reflection over the next few days, I realized that it was the first election night in my entire life (and I have been watching elections for as long as I can remember because in my family, every election is important) that I had not turned on the television or the radio. It is not so much a coincidence as a given that my first Internet-only election was won by a very Internet-savvy politician. This was probably the first election where the Internet, as a medium, had more influence over the outcome than any other medium. Building on Howard Dean's use of the Internet in the 2004 election, Obama's team parlayed the Web into a grassroots fund-raising machine and a key communication channel. The Obama administration continues to use the Internet as a critical component of their communications strategy, recognizing that many people, especially young people, get their information from the Internet.

Given the decline in both television and newsprint news, it certainly appears that the Internet is fast becoming most people's number one news medium, whether through conventional news organizations such as CNN or The New York Times (two news organizations that have made very successful leaps to Internet-based news), or through the "mash up" sites that gather news from a variety of sources and present it, or through more politically focused Web sites, such as the Huffington Post

But what of entertainment? Clearly, television is still the favoured device for watching entertainment. But how long will it be before televisions and computers converge? Indeed, they already are, with digital services delivered via cable's bandwidth and PSPs, iPods, and other handheld devices allowing users to watch movies in miniature. And once televisions and computers converge, will there be any further requirement for television shows to be delivered via commercial television stations?

The fact is, commercial television is passé. It is too rigid in its structure, too out-of-date with today's attention deficit-afflicted society. For many people, watching television now involves mindlessly flipping through dozens, if not hundreds, of channels, over and over again, avoiding commercials and rarely stopping to watch a show in its entirety. This probably has a lot to do with the amount of garbage being broadcast, but it also reflects a change in our viewing habits - we have learned to bounce around the Web and our attention span has decreased. Television is linear, and if you stop too long at any given station, you are confronted with a barrage of commercials, prompting you to flip again. Television is an old technology, in terms of how we interact with it. It is only a matter of time before commercial television disappears completely. 

It is now over six months since our cable was finally cut off, and I can honestly say that I have not missed television for even a minute during those months. Of course, I still rent movies on DVD, and I often borrow friends' DVDs of television programs. But I am no longer controlled by commercial television, which forced me to schedule my life around its programs, and drew me in to watching more garbage than I care to admit.




Thursday, May 7, 2009

Follow up: Planet of Sound and Internet Forums

It's been an interesting week with respect to my previous post. 

After I did not receive a reply to the letter I sent the owner of Planet of Sound, I decided to warn other customers about Planet of Sound's unfortunate return policy. Canuck Audio Mart is an online shopping mart for audiophiles, which has a very healthy forum of postings on audio topics, primarily focused on technology issues and other concerns of interest to the audiophile community.

Last Sunday night, I posted a brief warning about Planet of Sound's return policy on the general audio forum. Within minutes, a couple of other forum users had responded to my post, asking questions and making comments.

Over the next 24 hours, the responses continued, and escalated. Some people were clearly in agreement with my feeling that the store's return policy was unfair, and some people were very negative toward my post. In fact, some people got quite personal about it, referring to me as a "man-hater," "loser", and even worse epitaphs. It is astonishing the number of freaks, weirdos and psychos who populate these forums. People who had never met me made personal and awful statements about me, simply because I had posted my opinion about a particular audio retailer.

On the positive side, there were many intelligent posts, and many people who did agree with me that the policy was unreasonable. There were also intelligent posts by people who did not agree with me. And one person even posted a supportive note on my blog!

After twenty-four hours, there was such a flurry of activity, that the owner of Planet of Sound himself had to respond, and he responded several times over the following 24 hours, exaggerating many facts about the return transaction and suggesting I had been confrontational (When I returned to the store, the first thing he said to me was "no returns after 30 days." It was day 28. He then proceeded to tell me that there was nothing wrong with the unit and implied that my father and I were idiots. He then handed me off to a junior sales clerk. So yeah, I may have been a little emotional by that point, but I left the store apologizing for the return - that's how little he and his staff made me feel - with the exception of the nice young lady who sold us the unit in the first place - she was a pleasant exception.)

But as his forum posts continued, he was clearly on the defensive and had to stoop to criticizing me, rather than addressing the real issue - his return policy. A lot of people called him on his policy, and he was clearly unable to defend it successfully.

Over three days, there were 14 pages of posts, and the moderator finally closed off the posting.

Interestingly, within a few hours, the entire post had been deleted. I can only believe that Canuck Audio Mart's loyalty to one of their own (Planet of Sound probably pays some kind of fee as an audio dealer to participate on the site) made them decide to remove the post. 

That's okay. I have no doubt that Planet of Sound has lost at least the equivalent of the $400 I spent at the store in the form of future lost sales. And a recent Google search of "Planet of Sound Ottawa" put my forum post in the Top 10 results! That won't last long, but the point has been made, and that was what I set out to do.

Consumers should not accept poor service and should not allow retailers, whether they are online or bricks and mortar, to get away with these types of draconian return policies. The Internet provides many communities of opportunity to state your opinion - if you have the stomach to deal with the psychos, weirdos, and freaks who lurk on Internet forums. My husband refers to Internet forums as "refuges for the damaged." Methinks he exaggerates somewhat, but it was a telling experience.

Caveat emptor!

But also, 

Voluptas ultionis melius longo degustatur intervallo, which, roughly translated, means "the pleasure of revenge can be enjoyed for a long time."




Sunday, May 3, 2009

Consumer Rights - Exercise Your Power!

Women make many of the major decisions with respect to household purchases. In the world today, it is very difficult to wield much influence; however, as consumers, we actually have a fair amount of power and influence. Have you ever written a letter to a corporation, complaining about a defective product? Generally, the response is swift and positive - most companies understand that if one consumer writes a letter, there are probably hundreds, if not thousands of other consumers out there who have the same complaint. And all those consumers have one thing in common - they talk to other consumers about their shopping habits. A small issue can quickly mushroom into a bad reputation for a company. Most companies want to nip these issues in the bud as quickly as possible, which is why they are happy to hear from consumers. Otherwise, word hits the street and their reputation can be damaged before they have the opportunity to make things right. Word of mouth is probably the most common form of advertising for most retailers.

I recently had a very unfortunate incident with a local retail store. I purchased a piece of audio equipment for my 80 year-old father, which did not work well. Upon returning it, I was treated like a pariah. My only recourse was to write the retailer after the fact and ask him to make things right. He did not. Below is the letter I sent him. This is an example of a small retailer who does not understand the power of the consumer. I have now posted my complaint on several audio web sites and linked them to this blog. I hope the owner will think twice the next time he receives a similar complaint.

As consumers, we do have some power. Speak up! Write a letter! Post a bad review on a Web site. Don't let the retailer get away with poor service! Exercise your considerable consumer rights!


March 31, 2009

 

Gunnar Van Vliet
Planet of Sound
1194 Bank Street
Ottawa, ON

Dear Mr. Van Vliet:

I am following up on a transaction that occurred at your store on March 28. As a consumer and customer of your store, I think it is important that you understand my concerns with that transaction.

On February 28, I purchased a Squeezebox Boom, with my father. I set it up for my father, who is 80 and has trouble with technical gadgets. I had no problems with the setup and it worked fine for a few days. However, my father relocated the unit to his bedroom, and from that moment forward, he had problems with it. Most of the stations buffered almost constantly.

I attempted to troubleshoot the problem, but I could find nothing wrong with the unit’s set-up. As a person familiar with technology, I put it down to a poor underlying technology: Internet radio (which, even at the best of times, is not entirely reliable) and the wireless modem’s signal. Since Saturday, I have done some investigation, and it appears that my assumption is probably correct. A number of reviews and sites on the Internet point to the problem. Here is one example: http://the-gadgeteer.com/2009/01/30/logitech-squeezebox-boom-review/.

My father, however, continued to try and get the unit to work properly. He read the entire technical manual, which he downloaded (and which was very poorly written), he called the Logitech help line, and he spoke to you once, at length, about the issues he was having. I think it is fair to say that my father tried everything he could to get the product to work. Notwithstanding his lack of technical prowess, the unit clearly was not functioning optimally and despite his best efforts (and yours, mine, and Logitech’s) to get to the bottom of the issue, he was unable to.

After weeks of frustration, my father asked me to return the unit for him (it was purchased on my credit card).

I returned the unit on my father’s behalf. Here’s a summary of what then occurred:

  • I returned the product, in its original packaging, and was told that the product was fine, and therefore, it was the consumer who was the problem.
  • You charged a 25% restocking fee, for a unit that had originally been a display unit (and no discount was ever provided for that), and that was returned in its original packaging, and in working condition.
  • You would not provide a refund on the remaining 75%, but instead provided a store credit.

 So, here’s the bottom line:

 We purchased a product that, despite our best efforts, did not live up to our expectations.

  • My father is very frustrated by the product he purchased, he is out $100, and we are forced to return to your store to spend $300.
  • You have received the unit back with full packaging, and you can therefore sell the unit again for its full price. You have also secured the $400 of the original purchase, including a $100 “repackaging” charge.

 From my perspective, you, the retailer, have come out of this transaction very nicely, and my father has come out of it frustrated and $100 poorer. However, it could have been different, under the following scenarios:

  •  We returned the product. You accepted that it did not live up to our expectations and did not imply that we were somehow at fault. (This would be in keeping with the claim on your Web site: “We want to sell products that will make you happy and perform for a lifetime.”)
  • You explained the 25% repackaging fee, and then credited back the other 75% to my credit card, OR
  • You explained the 25% repackaging fee, but indicated that if we were willing to take a store credit, you could credit us back 100%.

 The outcome would have been a win-win: my father would have been mollified about an unsatisfactory product and I would have been reasonably refunded. You would still have the $400 product to resell, a $100 restock fee OR a completed $400 transaction.

 You, however, chose to make this a win for you and a loss for me and my father.

 My mother owned a small bookshop for many years, and I am a big supporter of the independent retailer. I admire those who find a small niche and go up against “the big boys” in the retail industry. You are competing for that most fickle of all souls – the retail consumer. What better way to secure their future custom than to treat them well and make their retail experience the best it can be? You cannot compete with the big stores on price, but you can compete with them on service, and that is the secret to most small retailers’ success. Were I to have returned the Squeezebox to Future Shop or Best Buy, they would have taken it back, no questions asked, with a full refund. Your return policy, however, puts you in a competitive deficit with respect to this aspect of customer service.

 Word of mouth is probably your biggest advertising medium. I would therefore like to give you the opportunity to change my mind about your store. If you are willing to either (a) give us the full ~$400 credit at your store, or (b) refund the ~$300 to my credit card, then I think you will win back our business and a positive view of your store. I hope you will consider this option in the name of good customer service and public relations.

 Sincerely,

Catherine


Sunday, April 26, 2009

The Phenomenon of Facebook - A True Story

I sent this tale to the New York Times Magazine's Lives Lived column, but they rejected me. The beauty of a blog is that you can post all your rejected submissions on your own!

In 1969, when I was seven years old, my family moved from Canada to England for a year. My father, a college professor, had a year’s sabbatical, and enrolled in a Master’s of Linguistics program at the University of Essex. We took a ship across the ocean (because my mother doesn’t fly), and settled down in southeast England, on a small and somewhat obscure island near the town of Colchester, called Mersea.

Mersea Island was a child’s paradise. Miles of beaches, lined with small huts, were deserted in the off-season. The house we rented was huge, and came with a dog and a cat, left behind by the owner, who had business in Libya that year. The house was located on a street with only a few other homes, and the roadway was unpaved. Our backyard was filled with flower beds and apple trees. All around our property were grassy fields, quiet lanes, small woods, and riding paths – a pastoral wonderland for a child accustomed to the decidedly urban landscape we inhabited in Canada. 

My mother, British by birth, plunged her only daughter into the full English experience. School uniform, sweets at the sweet shop, Enid Blyton and C.S. Lewis, piano lessons (given by the local corsetiere, who clearly needed to supplement a lagging career), and, best of all, weekly riding lessons at Miss Catchpole’s Riding Academy. Miss Catchpole’s was a mish-mash of tin-roofed stables that housed ponies and horses of all sizes and temperaments, including “Charlie,” a pony with long curly reddish hair. Charlie delighted in rolling on the Mersea sands, and consequently had to be kept on a lead. As the most inexperienced of all Miss Catchpole’s students, I usually ended up on Charlie.

At the stables, my mother chatted with another parent, and I was soon introduced to a young girl my own age – Louise – who lived not far from us. As it is with young children, we became friends very quickly, our mutual love of all things horsey bonding us. We drew horses together, we rode imaginary horses through the lanes and woods of Mersea, we entered national newspaper contests to win ponies, and generally lived, breathed, and ate horses and ponies, in the fashion of all horse-mad young girls and women.

The year sped by. As I rode Charlie or galloped my bicycle to Louise’s house for tea once a week, my father completed his master’s degree. In 1970, we returned to Canada. Louise and I exchanged a few letters, and she sent me pictures of her new pony, Silver Sixpence, but we eventually lost touch with each other. My father took me out riding a few times back in Canada, but Western-style riding did not appeal to me, and I lost interest after a few months.

Years later, I returned to Mersea Island for a brief drive through with my husband, to show him this idyllic spot. Mersea had changed, but not as much as I thought, and I easily found our old house and some of my old haunts. Miss Catchpole’s Riding Academy, alas, was gone, as was the sweet shop. I did not try and look up my friend Louise. At the time, I wanted to preserve my memory of two horse-mad little girls.

But as I reached my mid-forties, connecting with old friends became more important. The Internet has opened up a relatively easy tunnel for mining the past. I recently rediscovered several friends through Facebook. But I searched in vain for any signs of my old friend Louise, until one day, I found a Facebook Group for people who had lived on Mersea Island. I joined the group and posted a brief note about my year there, mentioning Louise, Miss Catchpole, and even Charlie, the horse, wondering if anyone out there would respond.

Within two weeks, I had an email from a woman who had seen my post and who had known all three of my long-ago acquaintances. We exchanged a few tentative emails, confirming facts and comparing notes. Convinced of her legitimacy, I asked her to remember me to my old friend, Louise. But her reply was not what I expected. She explained that, not only were Miss Catchpole and Charlie long gone, but my friend Louise had also died.

After several further exchanges, she provided me with details about Louise’s life, and the fact that Louise had succumbed to a brain tumour in her early thirties. The little girl of my memories had grown up and blossomed into a nurse, a wife, and a popular riding companion. She had lived in London and St-Tropez, and owned several horses. Louise had returned to Mersea, where she spent the rest of her short life. Her family and friends had been devastated by her death, the woman explained.

My cherished Mersea memories are now altered forever by the intrusion of facts and reality. I no longer think of that wonderful year without a tinge of sadness, knowing that my old friend is gone. Yet, at the same time, my memories of Louise have become more real to me because I now know what became of her. She is no longer just a dim childhood memory and a few old photos in an album, but a real person who lived her life. That somehow makes my magical year in Mersea even more important to me, although I’m not entirely sure why.

People and Relationships

The other night, I told a couple of friends that I was reading Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People. They groaned and laughed and hoo'd and ha'd, until I asked them what was so funny. I pointed out that many of our women friends complain on a regular basis about how rude and inconsiderate people are, how difficult some of their relationships are, at home and at work, and with friends. So why did they find it so funny that I would be reading this particular book? 

How to Win Friends and Influence People was published in 1936 (according to Wikipedia) and has sold over 15 million copies. That was good enough for me to at least wonder if there are a few useful nuggets in the book that might help me deal with some of my more challenging moments as I pass through what I have come to think of as "the angry years." These are the years when, due to work, stress, financial pressures, family responsibilities, and relationship strains, it is easier than ever to get annoyed at minor infractions by persons known and unknown. And as we get older, I think we do tend to become a little too protective of our own dignity, personal space, and perceived position in society.

About eighteen months ago, I had some issues with a senior manager where I work. The man was difficult, to say the least, at the best of times. He was also prone to drinking excessively at lunchtime, then coming back to work and being verbally abusive and obstreperous to fellow managers and employees alike (not to mention customers). I am the only female manager in a sea of IT professionals, who serve a customer base made up primarily of engineers in the defense industry, many of whom have military backgrounds. Can you think of a work situation more likely to feed the fires of female midlife anger? This guy was simply the icing on the cake.

Thankfully, I was mature enough to at least see that I was in a no-win situation. He was the senior manager of our organization, and I had to put up and shut up. The silver lining in all this was my direct manager, who was as smooth as silk with everyone. He inspired me. How could he take the crap our senior manager handed down daily and keep smiling? He inspired me enough to take a course in conflict management, and to take advantage of our Employee Assistance Program to get a little one-on-one counselling on dealing with Mr. Boor, the senior manager.

And surprise, surprise - I actually learned a few practical steps to deal with direct conflict that actually worked! The first one was "Conflict is inevitable; combat is optional." This was a revelation to me at the age of 45. I could disagree with someone and not have to take it personally and get into a fight! I could simply say "That's great - we see things differently!" It was a huge weight off my soul, quite literally.

So eighteen months later, after putting these practical lessons into practise, I am much more effective at dealing with conflict situations and not emerging from these discussions feeling terrible. But I still find that I run into situations and people where these practical lessons do not help. And so, I wanted to dig a little deeper into how to set an initial tone with people that would engender good relationships from the start, whether colleagues or strangers on the street that I encounter as part of day-to-day urban living. That's when I found How to Win Friends and Influence People. I bought the audiobook and listened to it on my iPod as I ran. It was not so much a revelation as a reminder of how easy it is to interact with people if we simply stop focusing on ourselves, and pay attention to the human being in front of us, or on the phone, or on the other side of the counter.

I highly recommend this book as a refresher in human relations and understanding people. The basic principles of Mr. Carnegie's book are listed below. But the book itself provides many real-life illustrations and examples (however dated some of them may be - the principles still apply - human beings have not changed that much in the past 70 years) and is an interesting and lively read.

Fundamental Techniques in Handling People

Principle 1 - Don't criticize, condemn or complain
Principle 2 - Give honest, sincere appreciation
Principle 3 - Arouse in the other person an eager want (i.e., make them want to help you)

Six Ways to Make People Like You

Principle 1 - Become generally interested in other people
Principle 2 - Smile
Principle 3 - Remember that a person's name is, to that person, the sweetest and most important sound in any language (i.e., remember people's names)
Principle 4 - Be a good listener. Encourage other people to talk about themselves
Principle 5 - Talk in terms of the other person's interests
Principle 6 - Make the other person feel important and do it sincerely

How to Win People to Your Way of Thinking

Principle 1 - The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it
Principle 2 - Show respect for the other person's opinion. Never say, "You're Wrong"
Principle 3 - If you are wrong, admit it quickly and emphatically
Principle 4 -Begin in a friendly way
Principle 5 - Get the other person saying "Yes! Yes!" immediately
Principle 6 -Let the other person do a great deal of the talking
Principle 7 - Let the other person feel that the idea is his or hers
Principle 8 - Try honestly to see things from the other person's point of view
Principle 9 - Be sympathetic to the other person's ideas or desires
Principle 10 - Appeal to the nobler motives
Principle 11 - Dramatize your ideas
Principle 12 - Throw down a challenge

Be a Leader - How to Change People Without Giving Offense or Arousing Resentment

Principle 1 - Begin with praise and honest appreciation
Principle 2 - Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly
Principle 3 - Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person
Principle 4 - Ask questions instead of giving direct orders
Principle 5 - Let the other person save face
Principle 6 - Praise the slightest improvement and praise every improvement
Principle 7 - Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to
Principle 8 - Use encouragement. Make the fault seem easy to correct
Principle 9 - Make the other person happy about doing the thing you suggest

It is actually quite extraordinary how well these simple principles work, and it is equally extraordinary how many people today do not apply them. Part of the reason, I'm sure, is because we are all so busy and have to interact with so many people and deal with so many channels of communication. But these principles are easy enough to put into practise without burdening ourselves, and the outcomes actually smooth and expedite many of the daily transactions we have to conduct.

I encourage anyone who has become disheartened or fed up with people, in general or specifically, to read this book and apply some of the techniques. You may find that many of your issues simply go away by using these simple but magic principles.