Comments on: Lose with Dignity. Celebrate with Grace. (Part II)

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:09:29 +0000

Great stuff.

By: Mantuitive

Mantuitive — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:47:36 +0000

The humble brag analysis was really incisive. It got me thinking about the way that social media, and media in general has altered the way we conduct ourselves in our personal and professional lives. In short, fame has become a form of currency and there are many people who are all about accruing more and more of it. That could be a wide receiver doing an endzone celebration or a sales executive who just landed a big account and wants to brag about it via twitter. Somehow getting recognition has become more important than actual accomplishment. To paraphrase ‘The Wire’, “We used to make things in this country. Now we just make ourselves into things.”

By: Nate

Nate — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:41:36 +0000

In Proverbs, it says ‘Let another praise you and not your own mouth; someone else and not your own lips.” Especially when it comes to social media/Internet, I think this verse is incredibly useful to remember. While it is OK to share in excitement — “what a great win today!” or “Got the job!” — there really isn’t a way to publicize on your own platform (twitter, facebook, etc.) about an award without sounding self-serving.

There is a time and place to properly acknowledge an award and thank those who helped make it possible, but that place is not in social media.

I speak from experience: a co-worker last year publicized on all social media platforms he had (twitter, facebook, his personal blog) about a statewide award he had won (competing against many fellow employees; I wasn’t involved). It was the humble brag stuff (‘I’m so honored to win this award’), but he quickly ostracized himself from the entire office. So much so that he eventually had a falling out with his immediate bosses, and within six weeks of winning a prestigious award (and it was), he was basically forced out of his job for bragging about winning. It reminded us all of the importance of how to act on social media platforms.

By: Taylor Smith

Taylor Smith — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:55:36 +0000

I will never understand why so many people seem to enjoy schadenfreude more than the feeling of winning. And good point about those who downplay their achivements, and in the process denigrate their opponents.

By: Mr.Ed

Mr.Ed — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 21:14:44 +0000

Steven September 16, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Big Man, is that a “humble brag?” – show ’nuff was!

I liked all the points – especially including everyone in the credit. Sure, maybe you could have done it without them, but how difficult would it have been, would it have been as much of a success.

“Running up the score” – I am torn on that one. In general, I’m thinking it very unmanly to continue past a point where the opponent has no realist chance of regaining the ground. Ditto on more usual “physical interaction” with strangers – if you gut-punch some fool for swearing at your old lady at the club, you DON’T have to beat them to a pulp. Unmanly.

On the other hand, if you have a particularly braggadocious opponent, or someone was say, unremittantly vulgar or threatening to you(or a loved one), running up the score on the board (or the side of their head) might be very manly.

By: Steven

Steven — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:45:05 +0000

Big Man, is that a “humble brag?”

By: StephanieB

StephanieB — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 16:22:20 +0000

Great post! I know this post is generally directed toward men, but alot of these concepts are universal and I get alot out of it! I really appreciated in this post that it’s better to say it like it is rather than cover up with a humblebrag, which when you read them are obviously ridiculous. Thanks for reminding me how to win with grace!

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 20:59:10 +0000

@JJ (September 15, 2011 at 2:23 pm):

Fair points, but I think it’s difficult for us to accurately judge what George C. Scott’s motivations were. Granted, Scott viewed his profession with a somewhat elitist attitude; he considered screen acting in films to be far inferior to stagecraft, as an art form. Moreover, he was a deeply troubled person: angry, self-loathing and heavy-drinking.

Mostly, I thought it was worth presenting another side to the story. The dead cannot speak to defend their reputations.

By: deirdre

deirdre — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:41:41 +0000

I am trying to reach the people behind this awesome blog so we can discuss a content partnership- please shoot me an email : )

By: JJ

JJ — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:23:27 +0000

Eh, I’m not sure how context of Scott’s decision excuses his behavior. The idea that a Hollywood actor–the most public profession there is–could “privately” resolve the the issue is sort of ridiculous. If the Academy had dropped his name from the running for nomination, people would have cried foul–Patton was been a big film, and people would have lambasted the Academy for not nominated him. The truth would have come out still. And it still would have been a big story that sucked up all the attention. And even if, yes, the Academy didn’t honor his wishes, I think a gentleman would have just been a sport about it. Yes, a man’s got to have conviction, but this is not a moral or ethical dilemma, just a man being a primma donna. My two cents.