Looking to buy: Paul Insect neon canvas., by met on Apr 11, 2022 5:15:26 GMT 1,

Apr 8, 2022 22:37:33 GMT 1 devinwcc said:

Hi Met,

Thank you for your constructive criticism. Adding the note about David Pelham’s book cover is a great suggestion. It’s been passed along to the team responsible for writing the additional information sections. To admit a fault, I did not read through that particular tag -- just selected the piece and let it auto populate. And I see your perspective… the language used is a bit jargon laden and jumbled.

Harsh words are to be expected on an Internet forum, and tbh I chuckled at the “carpet salesman” bit. Nonetheless, I would like to assert the West Chelsea Contemporary galleries maintain an excellent reputation across our Austin and New York locations.

Any reader who would like additional information on this piece or our collection as a whole can reach me via email: devin@wcc.art.

All the best,

Devin

Cheers for the acknowledgement.

Your good-natured, composed tone was appreciated as well. It's a credit to your temperament.


[Of the character traits almost guaranteed to make others lose some respect for us, defensiveness, passive aggression, petulance and excessive belligerence would be among them. They're sadly pretty common, and often on display in responses to actual or perceived criticism.

We were recently witness to an example of this, in a thread which could serve as a case study on how not to react online*. Multiple shrill posts in rapid succession seemed to evidence an individual lacking both control over their emotions and a sense of proportion. One must also hope their reference to "Sub human Scum" was down to an ignorance of 20th century history. Because the alternative explanation (i.e. a knowing use of Untermensch-style terminology) would be just too obscene.]



Although the point of my initial post was already made, some elaboration may be helpful now that you (in your capacity as consultant and seller) have joined us:

Whether in the form of an Additional Info blurb or otherwise, text from your website or email communications does merit being checked over with care.

The rationale for such an approach is straightforward: Especially since the vast majority of your potential clients will have never met you, all of that text will in some way influence their impressions of you and the gallery — in terms of your perceived knowledge, competence, professionalism, and mindfulness, including attention to detail.

Bad drafting will of course reflect poorly on you. As will inaccurate or out-of-date information (like the assertion that Lazarides Gallery represents Banksy). They may, in turn, have a negative impact on client confidence and peace of mind.

With competition in the art market being so fierce, and reputation in the industry being all-important, it makes commercial sense to ensure that anything written by you (or by somebody else on the gallery's behalf) is, to the extent practicable, double or triple-checked and treated as if it were your calling card or an advertisement for the gallery.


__________


Side comment about your observation, "Harsh words are to be expected on an Internet forum":

From a general standpoint, we're in full agreement here. You've described a downside that frequently goes hand-in-hand with anonymity or relative anonymity on the internet.

But in case you were also suggesting the words I chose were harsher than what I'd say if we were chatting in person, that would be incorrect. Whether online, by telephone, or in their presence, I try to be candid with people (unless I've reason to believe they are unstable or lack normal levels of mental resilience).


While this is perhaps a minor point, the principle is important to me. There is a handful of rules I set for myself with regard to each of my posts on public forums. Among others, these rules include:

(i)  never writing anything I wouldn't say to somebody's face;

(ii)  never writing anything I'd likely feel embarrassed or ashamed about if it were read (immediately or 10 years from now) by family, friends, professional contacts, bosses or employees; and

(iii)  never deleting (or editing the substance of) any of my existing posts.


It is a self-imposed discipline which is aimed at pushing me. First, to think very carefully before posting (and, where appropriate, carry out suitable amounts of prior research), to try to make sure my comments are accurate, non-misleading, considered and even-handed. Second, to avoid behaviour that could be seen as cowardly or otherwise dishonourable.



On a separate note and as alluded to in the previous paragraph, I do make efforts to ensure my criticisms (whether severe or mild) are not unfair. They're mostly expressed in a wry, detached manner, without malice — akin to the kind of badgering a mate might receive if they showed up to the pub one evening with a bad haircut.


__________


Welcome to the forum.

Apr 8, 2022 22:37:33 GMT 1 devinwcc said:

Hi Met,

Thank you for your constructive criticism. Adding the note about David Pelham’s book cover is a great suggestion. It’s been passed along to the team responsible for writing the additional information sections. To admit a fault, I did not read through that particular tag -- just selected the piece and let it auto populate. And I see your perspective… the language used is a bit jargon laden and jumbled.

Harsh words are to be expected on an Internet forum, and tbh I chuckled at the “carpet salesman” bit. Nonetheless, I would like to assert the West Chelsea Contemporary galleries maintain an excellent reputation across our Austin and New York locations.

Any reader who would like additional information on this piece or our collection as a whole can reach me via email: devin@wcc.art.

All the best,

Devin

Cheers for the acknowledgement.

Your good-natured, composed tone was appreciated as well. It's a credit to your temperament.


[Of the character traits almost guaranteed to make others lose some respect for us, defensiveness, passive aggression, petulance and excessive belligerence would be among them. They're sadly pretty common, and often on display in responses to actual or perceived criticism.

We were recently witness to an example of this, in a thread which could serve as a case study on how not to react online*. Multiple shrill posts in rapid succession seemed to evidence an individual lacking both control over their emotions and a sense of proportion. One must also hope their reference to "Sub human Scum" was down to an ignorance of 20th century history. Because the alternative explanation (i.e. a knowing use of Untermensch-style terminology) would be just too obscene.]



Although the point of my initial post was already made, some elaboration may be helpful now that you (in your capacity as consultant and seller) have joined us:

Whether in the form of an Additional Info blurb or otherwise, text from your website or email communications does merit being checked over with care.

The rationale for such an approach is straightforward: Especially since the vast majority of your potential clients will have never met you, all of that text will in some way influence their impressions of you and the gallery — in terms of your perceived knowledge, competence, professionalism, and mindfulness, including attention to detail.

Bad drafting will of course reflect poorly on you. As will inaccurate or out-of-date information (like the assertion that Lazarides Gallery represents Banksy). They may, in turn, have a negative impact on client confidence and peace of mind.

With competition in the art market being so fierce, and reputation in the industry being all-important, it makes commercial sense to ensure that anything written by you (or by somebody else on the gallery's behalf) is, to the extent practicable, double or triple-checked and treated as if it were your calling card or an advertisement for the gallery.


__________


Side comment about your observation, "Harsh words are to be expected on an Internet forum":

From a general standpoint, we're in full agreement here. You've described a downside that frequently goes hand-in-hand with anonymity or relative anonymity on the internet.

But in case you were also suggesting the words I chose were harsher than what I'd say if we were chatting in person, that would be incorrect. Whether online, by telephone, or in their presence, I try to be candid with people (unless I've reason to believe they are unstable or lack normal levels of mental resilience).


While this is perhaps a minor point, the principle is important to me. There is a handful of rules I set for myself with regard to each of my posts on public forums. Among others, these rules include:

(i)  never writing anything I wouldn't say to somebody's face;

(ii)  never writing anything I'd likely feel embarrassed or ashamed about if it were read (immediately or 10 years from now) by family, friends, professional contacts, bosses or employees; and

(iii)  never deleting (or editing the substance of) any of my existing posts.


It is a self-imposed discipline which is aimed at pushing me. First, to think very carefully before posting (and, where appropriate, carry out suitable amounts of prior research), to try to make sure my comments are accurate, non-misleading, considered and even-handed. Second, to avoid behaviour that could be seen as cowardly or otherwise dishonourable.



On a separate note and as alluded to in the previous paragraph, I do make efforts to ensure my criticisms (whether severe or mild) are not unfair. They're mostly expressed in a wry, detached manner, without malice — akin to the kind of badgering a mate might receive if they showed up to the pub one evening with a bad haircut.


__________


Welcome to the forum.