What am I missing here? Does this mean there are Google searches that can irritate people that I need to be made aware of? That I am, through ignorance, deprived of some small joy?
I can't tell if you're being frivolous or serious, but for the rest of the board I'll offer an example.
In the military, the phrase "early retirement" is a pejorative reference to being forced out-- usually by medical issues-- on a smaller pension. It has other names like "temporary disabled retirement list" or "limited duty". I spent a lot of my career at training commands dealing with these types of issues, like HIV-positive active-duty servicemembers, and I understand their feelings. Essentially the servicemember is being forced out with minimal benefits and they usually object to some part of the process.
So that veteran, typically extremely unhappy and a bit distraught and forced into a series of quick decisions, will run a Google search for the words "military early retirement". This board's SEO makes it one of the first results for that term, usually ahead of the DoD and veteran's advocacy groups. This is why we've had veterans showing up here for advice on the military's medical evaluation process, and why I've written a FAQ to redirect them. Otherwise we're pretty much wasting their time (and the moderators' time), just like a high percentage of the other newbs who are funneled here by the marketing.
I do, however, wonder about the "veteran" qualification. Do you really believe that someone who wasn't born here could have nothing of quality to offer merely because of a timing issue -- failing to stumble upon this forum quickly enough? You know, some of us are merely "slow learners" not deserving of such ridicule.
I think you could lighten up on the confrontational strawman approach.
I think that a person's posts quickly establish their credibility-- or lack of it. The more they post, the easier the conclusion. Their longevity through an economic cycle or two (especially the guys who were on the 1990s TMF ER board) also gives them a sense of perspective & balance that's much more credibile than the Pollyannas or doom&gloom posters. And when you've read 50 debates on whether or not to pay off the mortgage, you're able to sort through the issues and address the ones that pertain to an individual poster.
I'm open to new data and to aspects I hadn't considered. I spent 20 years in one of the military's harshest criticism crucibles, and I'm not easily offended by having my ideas subject to objective assessment. It's great when an expert in some other field, like electronics or taxes or landlording, shows up with their experience & widsom. But if a newer poster hasn't seen all the permutations of the ER issues on this board, then they aren't as much help as an ER who's been here for a while.
Nords, it seems I'm always the last to hear about these sort of things (reminds me of the old w*rk days, last on the grapevine). Could you update me on what this is all about or point me to somewhere where this was discussed? Didn't know the site had changed to a "for profit" one. I've enjoyed reading your posts in the past.
I'd recommend that you take that up with Andy R.
I've said it ad nausem: I don't care for the way this site is run for profit.
...but have no problem mining it for content for the book you are writing?
hear, hear...
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. If I'm looking for experts, I go to where they are-- whether or not I agree with the board's management or some of its other posters. I've been through quite a few other military & ER boards and this is the one with the most experts.
Or maybe you think I have a profit motive. As the veterans know, and for the benefit of those who may not have bothered to read my "About Me" profile, the project is non-profit. I'm writing to learn more about the book process and to pay forward all the mentoring & advice I've received over the years from other veterans. Profits (if any) will go to military charities.
I'd pay the cost of publishing and give the copies away if I felt it would do any good. But I think readers would be more likely to value the book (and to spread the word) if their money was going to a good cause. Of course I'm not sure how to (or even if I should) bring this non-profit subject up with a publisher.
I also personally feel that some readers may believe a writer's ER advice is adversely impacted by royalties. Those readers are generally ignorant about how little money a writer really makes, especially at an hourly rate. (Bob Clyatt and the Kaderlis can vouch for that!) So donating to charity seems like a more positive contribution than having to deal with snide comments.
