how yahoo got on my shitlist.

of all emails, i have been with yahoo the longest.
i still have (i believe) my original 8th grade yahoo account.
if it's not the first, it's the second. at absolute worst.
back when email and AIM were the only social modes of communication.

and i haven't left it yet, if only because i enjoy those random Facebook-esque moments when people look into their address books and rediscover that email. it's easier than updating everyone to my gmail, and besides, i use my yahoo and gmail accounts differently. partly because of the huge influx of spam i get to my yahoo account. i mean on a given day i get upwards of 50 spam messages. that's with spam blocker enabled, and with my specifying "which messages are spam."

i understand the email's been "out there" for years.
i understand you're "doing what you can" to help with spam.
hell, i even get that with all your money, maybe you can't make your spam filters better. i even accept that some people want what i'd consider spam and so filters may not be the best answer.

but the heart of why they're on my shitlist is you can only block a grand total of 500 emails of spam. i'm getting really, really close to that number. to boot, it's really difficult to weed through blocked emails in case i want to unblock someone. if i have 400+ emails blocked and i accidentally blocked an Amazon email, i literally can't find the time to locate and unblock that email address. there is no search function. just one long scrolling list.

regardless. my real question is.
WHY ARE YOU LIMITING THE NUMBER OF EMAIL SENDERS I VIEW AS SPAM TO MY INBOX?
...isn't that MY choice? and after 7+ years, don't you think my numbers might be a bit high? way to penalize your long time users. and make us run screaming from our inbox in a tragically let-down manner. toward your competitors. hell. at least gmail's spamblocker does its job. (we'll see how long that lasts. only had that one for 2-3 years.)

Riot's day in brands. & analysis thereof.

[the brand montage a la dear jane][see larger logos]

rather than do a TYPICAL day in the life of Riot brands, i decided to do an EXACT day in the life. and analyze what all that means to me. i realized in the doing that it wasn't exactly what i thought it would be, nor was it exactly representative. this is MAY 23 08. thoughts below. anything marked with an asterisk didn't have a Google-able logo.

THE BREAKDOWN: AM WAKEUP
08:15: verizon • LG
08:18: DELL • Adobe Photoshop • IE
08:30: Crest • Oral-B • Dove • Gilette • Axe • Tom Ford
08:33: lolo* • rave* • Saucony • TWLOHA • Style&Co
08:40: FOX • Sephora • Neutrogena • CoverGirl • Benefit • Urban Decay • MAC
08:50: Nike • Nissan Maxima • Fueled by Ramen

THE ARRIVAL: AM WORK
09:00: Apple • N.Design Studio • Intellimerge • Firefox • Entourage • iChat
09:04: Cafe Du Monde • Stop&Shop Tea • Domino Sugar
09:11: Apple • Firefox • Google • WordPress • Blogger • Twitter
10:05: Firefox • Twitter • Amazon • TextEdit • Verizon • LG
11:35: iTunes • TextEdit • Firefox • Twitter

LUNCH TIME+: AFTERNOON DAZE
01:28: Verizon • LG • Altamira* • Dickies • MasterCard • HSBC
01:50: Gino's* • Gatorade • Chase • HSBC • Twitter
02:11: TextEdit • Quark • iChat

FREEDOM: POST-WORK WIND DOWN
05:00: Verizon • LG • Nissan Maxima
05:14: DELL • IE • MSN • Chatroom*
06:45: Tina's II*
08:32: Verizon • LG
08:45: DELL • IE • MSN • Chatroom*
10:06: Verizon • LG
10:12: DELL • IE • MSN

GET THE FLOCK OUT OF HERE
11:16: Hyundai • Tom Ford • Nike • Lily Flanagan's • Blue Moon
11:43: Hyundai • Delicious • Subculture • Sambuca • More Sambuca
12:20: Black Haus • Peach Schnapps* • Southern Comfort • Rose's Lime
02:47: Hyundai
03:10: DELL • IE
03:20: Ford Taurus • Taco Bell • Ford Taurus • Crest • Oral-B

BEDTIME! Somewhere around 4AMish.

now, here are the interesting things when i consider a literal day in brands. as in what i actually used and did not use. this gets a little personal, but i promise there are deductions.

1 -- THE UN-BRANDS and their sneaky, sneaky ways: that particular day, i had a very, very casual friday. i was supposed to head onto the LIRR directly from work to see my very ill best friend in New Hyde Park, so i was in jeans, a tank, and kicks. not necessarily my daily work attire. not to mention, i couldn't have told you what bra brand and undies i was wearing that day--or socks. even though i'm usually a Vikki's Secret girl, and wear Journeys socks, i know i wasn't doing that. not to mention, i have no idea what brand of toilet paper my agency uses, nor have i any idea their faucet's brand, etc. as much as we are branded, there are still small simple places. i don't look down and see "Cottonell" imprinted on my toilet paper.

2 -- DEVIATIONS & SACRIFICE, or, Change of Plans: the best laid plans of mice and men. what happens when your brands aren't there for you? so i had to do laundry. so i didn't have Vikki's undies or Journeys socks. i had some nameless undergarments and borrowed my mom's socks. my agency was out of Tazo Earl Grey and PNGTips tea (the HORROR) so i had to drink Stop&Shop (sacrilege). i couldn't make it to my HSBC bank, so i had to use Chase, which is a bastard for charging $3 to take out my own cash and $1.50 to transfer funds. i don't like DELL or IE, but that's my laptop right now while i'm saving for a Mac(Black)book. i wear my Reverie Duel hoodie every day--except that one, because i couldn't find it. so my choices were reflective of my day, not my normal brand usage, and the psychology of pressure.

3 -- THE LIES ABOUT daily brand use: just because i use you daily, doesn't mean i'm loyal to you, or ever really like you. ie: DELL, case in point. Dove, too, whom i hate but it was there in the house. also, i only own 1 Dickies item (my wallet) and while i see the logo every day, it does nothing for me. likewise with Nike (my bag is my only Nike purchase) and FOX (my makeup bag--that's all). some things are like breathing, and i don't have to think about them--like my N.Design desktop at work. i use it, but i don't change it or interact with it, though i like the art. unlike, say, my ugly DELL's desktop, which i made using Audrey Kitching photos. yes, Lily Flanagan's is a usual haunt for me--but usually only on thursdays; had i gone to New Hyde Park, i never would have been there. to boot, all 3 cars mean nothing to me--they belong to (in order) my mom, my other best friend, and my partner.

4 -- ON TO PROM QUEENS & star quarterbacks: then, on to what really matters. what brands am i loyal to that i do actually use every day? what appears here that is typical of me, that i do think of as my personal "prom queen" brands? my alcohols, of course. i'm very picky with that. so Blue Moon, Sambuca, swedish fish shots, and Soco Lime are all pretty representative. add in Magic Hat #9, Goldschlager, Patron, Jose Cuervo, Ketel, and Reyka, and that's the short list of things i'll drink without spitting on you. my get-ready gear--Axe deodorant, Tom Ford Black Orchid perfume, my makeup, my daily tea. my style: never leave without at least a To Write Love On Her Arms button; Delicious shoes are club footwear of choice (Pleaser, too). my work habits--i need Apple, Adobe, iTunes, iChat, Twitter, Blogger, Firefox, Amazon, TextEdit. the real prom queens aren't necessarily hip; just what i can't live without.

the value isn't in the daily use, but instead in what i'd miss sacrificing. i wouldn't miss my Oral-b toothbrush, and i wouldn't cry if i had to switch from Crest. if i had to trade my Post-Its for Staples brand, that's okay by me. but don't you take my personal prom queens. don't you take Tazo Earl Grey from me; you'll be getting a fight. and don't you DARE take away my cell phone. its batteries died early yesterday. i was without it for 20 minutes. i cried a little--inside.

big projects

...eat my life.

will catch up with you crazy folks tomorrow.
i had a good weekend, how about you?

if any of these mean anything to you, let me know:
subculture (go see my fave bartender--she's on the left, i didn't take the pic), avenue of the americas street fair, joe (cup o', nuff said), uncle jack's steakhouse (i dare you to find a better filet mignon), fire island, ice palace, robert moses beach, bayard cutting arboretum. oh, and then my couch, with Home Alone II.

tomorrow i return with the full writeup and thoughts around my brand timeline.

clearly, i'm a brandwhore.

i have so many thoughts about this already and i've only been doing it for about and hour and a half. i've taken on dear jane's brand timeline challenge. and what an excellent day to do it. it's a dress down friday and i have a long, long day ahead of me. by this time, 9:44AM, i already have 40 brands (exactly) written down. i'm trying to be really meticulous and notice every brand i use. results will be posted tuesday. i may update this post today with any worthy thoughts surrounding my conscious brand experience.

zappos rocks. facebook scares kittens.

i can't say it better than Marshall Kirkpatrick, who reports on Facebook's message censorship. good comments going on there, too. censorship makes Riots very, very cranky. you don't want a cranky Riot, let alone multiple cranky Riots. you really don't need to know me in my plural state. anyway. i only recently started getting heavy into Facebook again after a year or two of App Intimidation, but the Flair app has assuaged me. this might send me running yet again.

in other news, Zappos is still bloody brilliant and is paying their employees $1000 to quit after one week. you're jealous you didn't think of it first. it's okay: you can still do it. something about imitation and flattery, right? i'm still trying to figure out why, if i'm so in love with how zappos runs things, i've still not been able to find a pair of shoes on that site worthy of ordering... i do want to support. i'm trying?

and lastly, it seems i've also become a connoisseur of the lolcat, and so, compliments of @ckieff, i give you Cats For Obama dot com.

DigitalNext doesn't want your...

...anything.

in fact, don't comment.
if you're passionate and opinionated, give up.
after all, blogging doesn't matter, anyway.

certainly don't attempt to have a conversation.
adage, screw you. take that for personal and offensive.

i went out of my way to REGISTER just to bloody comment on this post, which i addressed in my blog here. i am one for conversing, as many of you know. why not close the gap, get feedback from the person who wrote it? but since i can't use a url on AdAge, i just gave my abbreviated thoughts.

which have been deleted and censored.
"Ad Age reserves the right to delete comments that are insulting or personal in nature."

i did not insult the writer in any fashion. nor was anything i said personal. i was addressing the fact that, perhaps, this was not the best method, and that, perhaps, when i go to a store i like to see a person. a la the post i wrote.

what the fuck, AdAge? communicate this.

i have advertising thoughts.

so, after having the luck to engage in an interesting conversation with Ian Schafer, a very smart man, yesterday via Twitter, i decided to delve deeper into the advertising thoughts i initially considered in "huge tracks of land."

i asked what he thought of socialvibe and its implications, after reading something written in Adweek (wish i knew what it was, the link is gone now). he felt skeptical because it gives incentives for a given behavior, but felt that the fact socialvibe benefited charities may even it out. i replied that i liked it because it enabled users to choose what their profiles support, giving street cred to the ads.

he argued this would be problematic if all users were allowed to select their own advertising, because some advertisers wouldn't be selected, and users would inevitably support 'prom king' brands. which, naturally, has a lot of merit. because it's true.

but, nevertheless, the concept i'm talking about would only apply to a user's specific profile--not the apps page, or the main page, or 'common areas' owned by more than one person (ie, events or groups). in that way, less popular folks could still get the word out on the same platform, while making advertising more relevant on personal spaces. agreeing in theory, examples he offered were like nascar or skate decks.

i then asked him if he thought incentive was a bad thing to offer users, since it is the users who bring value (data) to the networks. after all, if the users weren't valuable, advertisers wouldn't be up in arms trying to sort out how to reach them effectively, and there wouldn't be such a bid on Facebook's ownership. and guess what? kids are starting to realize this. i wish i had the Facebook link, but kids were responding saying they wanted money for their data being used. i was floored.

in comparison to giving up cash flow, what's wrong with perk compensation for choice advertisements? ian replied saying that, "playing devil's advocate, isn't using a service for free compensation enough for seeing ads?" initially, i say, yes, by far it's compensation enough, even on a place like Twitter, where i'm not giving out a lot of data value. but on Facebook or Myspace? it seems the perfect way to solve the ad-relevance problem.

+ let users choose the ads their profile page sponsors.
[on social media sites in which the users offer up a lot of personal information, like Facebook and Myspace]
- give them the option of using socialvibe in its place.
[so that if they should want, they can donate to charity through their ads. not all users will opt for this, though, since i doubt socialvibe could host the multitude of sponsors kids will want, and i doubt those multitude of sponsors all want to donate to charity.]
+ use the socialvibe method for incentives
[each day the ad is up, you get 1 Entry. on a given day, there are drawings for incentives that support the user's chosen sponsor. IE, a $20 gift certificate to PacSun for those whose ads are for PacSun. this promotes brand value at the same time as not too much monetary loss. this also fosters elitism and competition, which also adds brand value.]
+ in this way, social space advertising becomes relevant
[if the ad reflects my friend's interests, i'm going to be equally as interested in his or her brand choices as their music choices. we show our sponsors on our tee shirts, from brands to clothing companies to coca cola; showing our preferences on our profiles will only add to this level of sharing. in fact, limiting the amount of sponsors a profile can have will become necessary, likely only 1-3. this increases response rate to advertisements. it also makes users feel like a worthwhile part of the cycle, rather than having ads be something purely ignored.]

these are my current advertising thoughts with regards to social media networks.
i'm already a walking advertisement. i'm supporting my socialvibe charity as i type this in my TWLOHA shirt while wearing matching MAC eyemakeup. why not capitalize on these tendencies and harness them to make advertising more useful without being more intrusive?