SPAMMING THIS FORM will be POINTLESS

        Application as
Co-Founder candidate

My secret ambition?

\

 
 





In an information economy, everything is different:

Smart people don't even want the pay, we want the equity, baby!

Visionary yet persistent and highly responsible pioneering Entrepreneurs
desperately needed:
Technicians, programmers, webdesigners, MBAs, CFOs, lawyers and paralegals, Activists, lobbyists, promoters, publicists, patent expertise, what-have-you! just to name a few, and others, anywhere in the world with an Internet connection, to form as yet unCapitalized new business start-up from scratch. No salary, expenses or commissions, heavy responsibility, long odds, no resources, grueling hardship, and the derived satisfaction, personal growth, learning, invaluable work experience, and challenging creativity of participation in a unique and intensely interesting cutting edge high tech inception stage venture. 

High chances of endless delay, fiscal disaster, calamitous failure and utter collective humiliation. Obscene profits, blue chip equity, acclaim, accomplishment, self realization, true love, and all from saving the world, should we succeed. Ideas a plus. Strategic Partners welcome. Promotional Exchange valued.

 

WARNING: Not a paying job, just an adventure!

 
 
 
 
Thank you for interviewing me!  

Indeed, you have the right and the obligation to make absolutely certain that you can afford the sacrifice, no matter what the appeal or hope, and regardless of how badly we need qualified and motivated personnel.

Hence, this is actually the first round of your interview of me, due diligence to at all seriously consider my application to work with you. Indeed, by all means, if desired, to reassure yourself that I really am standing by for your application/ inquiry, then by all means, establish contact first, before making substantive response or even undertaking due diligence. But, in that case, please so state, explicitly, to avoid confusion.

The purpose of this disillusioning application questionnaire is as much as anything also for you to ask yourself some tough questions, as anything else.

Any serious inquiry is entitled to the most pertinent replies we can offer to any germane questions. Indeed, this is crucial. There is no shame, and no one will think the less of anyone who, upon responsible and cautious review of the venture participation and it's hardships, then backs out before making any commitment.

That this can be a part time position only means that you may well find yourself committed to slaving away at this on top of whatever paying job and/or studies that you cannot afford to give up. A creative leadership niche, simply by virtue of the work load and the initiative that will be called for, along with the reciprocal support required internally for any chance of success. Individual initiative and experience driving interdependent situational shared leadership in parallel to best Epistemological Methodology of social attention to acknowledged expertise and capability.

Enjoy this website and all the content and interaction freely available herein!

To quote T George Harris, "It's the miner's headlamp, not the eureka flash, that drives reliable innovation. The process of innovation is the sweaty work of digging through tons of information to find a few golden nuggets -- mainly unlikely knowledge combinations."


To be taken seriously (otherwise not!), the first thing that you are now expected to do in order to begin the application process, to accompany your resume etc., is to  to study this interesting website:
FoolQuest. com thoroughly enough in order to sell yourself on whatever you can offer and what you can do, and how do you see yourself participating in a new venture from scratch, your own pursuit of happiness, mutual accountability, and what aspect of your responsibilities might ever actually appeal to you, given the considerable immediate term personal sacrifice which will as certainty and of necessity be both inevitable and indispensable.

By all means, make a complaint about whatever for you seems missing. If you only tell me what you are after, I will strive to be of help, best as I can. But whatever isn't here, I can promise you that being cagy won't draw it forth.

Then, if it is determined that you have given the matter any sort of considered opinion, and thus piqued my interest, then will commence an intensive interview by email. If you continue to hold up your end of the conversation (a must!), you may even find yourself persuaded to accept the dubious privilege of taking your place in the formation of Management Team to become an unpaid but equity vested Co-Founder, should you remain interested and if you still so choose.

No autoresponder. Your email is so very important to me, and will be answered promptly and seriously by a live human being, yours truly. Thus SPAM-like and irrelevant impersonal form cover letters will simply disqualify your application. Believe it ! And please tell where you first saw this text posted or linked. Or else that'll be a dead give away that you haven't even actually read this through.

To respond to this opportunity, fill out this form, provided.

Work in harmony with one's nature may renew hope for success. But to work against one's nature will all too often only work against you.

Things you might not want to hear!

For your own sake never mind anyone else's and just to spare needless aggravation all around, neither ignore, stonewall nor seek to evade any of the following questions, dealing as they do with crucial foreseeable problems and central concerns.

Never think even by half-assed misrepresentation via omission to inveigle others in to the hurtful futility of working at cross-purposes needlessly and fruitlessly, but rather, far better, let us all confront whatever obstacles squarely together and search diligently, exhaustively and wholeheartedly for any viable solutions as well as any genuine common ground.

And if, gentle reader, you ever come to find anything you confront here on this page stringent or burdensome, then do not fail to consider that this questionnaire deals primarily with the minimum needs, commitments and consideration of organization and planning during the most embryonic "kitchen table" inception phase or stage of new venture development, which most How-to advice into The Start Up Process commonly tends somewhat to gloss over, instead plunging headlong into the far more demanding process that follows, delving into such burning issues as when and at what juncture the partners must each and all finally quit their jobs and entirely commit themselves full time and resolutely risk all!

By comparison, all that is treated here is the proverbial cake walk and not any grinding "Start-up Boot Camp!"

 
 0
Non-Zero-Sum
interaction rather than turf protection
Information, expectations, values & code of conduct:
 

As identified by Daniel Goleman ('Emotional Intelligence' 1995), the five domains of emotional  intelligence or EQ, of understanding oneself, one's goals, intentions, responses, behavior and all, as well as also understanding others and their feelings, are as follows:

  1. Knowing ones emotions.
  2. Managing ones own emotions.
  3. Motivating oneself.
  4. Recognizing and understanding other's emotions.
  5. Managing relationships, i.e., managing other's emotions.
So, do you value just such self knowledge?
                <New Age bullshit Key to life>

 
 
And do you embrace responsibility for best constructive application of the above?
                 <In a pig's eye! with every fiber of my being>

 
Are you curious about others and how they feel?
                  <yawn, fuck'm all constant fascination>

 
And do you embrace responsibility for best constructive application of the above?
                  <In a pig's eye! with every fiber of my being>

 

EQ has been widely applied to improve corporate performance and sales, but not so much to Entrepreneurship and particularly not to the most crucial and neglected "kitchen table" or first concept stage or phase.

This questionnaire proceeds on the hypothesis that in the true liberty of maverick ambition, in the social world at large free of established structures of hierarchical dominance, the crux of success or failure in collaboration will tend to be interpersonal dyadic reciprocity rendering the responsibilities of Emotional Intelligence all the more crucial because there will be nothing whatsoever else left to fall back upon.

 
 
 
Behavioral willingness:
Can you keep your ego in check?   
 
- Admit crucial fallibility, inadequacy and ignorance?   
 
Disagree openly?   
 
Confront behavioral problems directly?
   
 
Prioritize collective success over personal?
   
 
Shine individually     even while placing priority upon supporting others in order to help make others look good?    
 
Do you have the right stuff for affinity collaboration?
   
Are you a strong reciprocator?
   
Do you reward reciprocity in kind?
Of course, it's only right and prudent!    
That's for suckers!    
Are you wiling to actually penalize and discourage non-reciprocity?
It may well be crucial to deter detrimentally exploitative
conduct, in order to preserve a group effort.    
Why should I ever concern or lower myself
to such vulgar tit-for-tat?     

 

How did you discover this website? To which link or posting are you responding? Different notices and links are posted in different places. Please copy and paste the backlink URL, websearch, or whatever. -Also to help gage response to each notice. Please neither omit nor gloss over this information. I do need to know, and I notice these things...

Also, if you are responding to a message on whatever sort of posting forum or bulletin board, then please be sure to specify whether you want a response to said forum, for us to discuss publicly, or else by email, privately.
 

 

So, does willingness and ability to provide the most simple and necessary backlink and reply information as above at all constitute a fair test, any sort of reasonable and accurate indicator of utter minimal competency and sincerity?   
 
Indeed, honestly, just what great things shall we accomplish together sans the minimal wherewithal to copy and paste a lousy stinkin' URL? Or is all such really too much to ask?     
 
Do you see such expectations in question herein, one way or another, either as a matter ofsimple real world observation as to what most website visitors will actually be willing to do, and nothing more and however arbitrarily, or elseas a distinct pragmatic matter of whatever attitudes and skill sets may actually be required towards the achievement of definable and desired goals?
 
Explain as needed...
 
So, have you discovered anything here on this site pertinent to what you seek or at all otherwise interesting? Do tell...
 
 

Who are you?

What is your name and address?

Name: 
Company: 
Address: 
 
City: 

State:  

Zip:  

 

 
 
Phone:
Home: 
Work: 
School: 
Mobile: 
Pager:
FAX:
 

 
 
 
Documents and correspondence:
please type in your correct email address into the field below
so that I may reply immediately upon receipt
Email:  <YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS HERE
Email verification will be the first step in processing your input!

Be sure to enter your email address in in order to receive prompt response!

 
 
 
Misc. other contact info:

 
Enter Date and Time
    Month   Day   Year   Time Am / Pm  
              
What is better?
a) To first enter into collaboration freely, making only such commitments as we each choose and together agree
b) To first rationally investigate and assess, however broadly, what is really required in order together to solve any given problem or achieve whatever goal, and then ask what and how much we are willing (or even able) to do about it
c) Or to simply to put forth positive contribution exactly how one pleases, no more no less, just as it strikes one's fancy without concerning oneself about anybody else at all...

How, if at all, is it possible: 
a) to inquire, responsibly, into the practical demands of feasibility regarding any given goal in order to then
b) make realistic plans and estimate what will be required,
c) for reasonable individuals contemplating collaboration then to understand before hand and freely make the necessary and reciprocal commitments, or else to decline?
 
 
Are you willing to at all consider new venture creation as a means or approach to projects and goals that are important or desirable?
   


Before committing to investment, venture capitalists need to feel certain that all business plans have been thought through in rigorous detail and to be to convinced of a large opportunity and market size, products and services that meet real needs and a team that can deliver the aforesaid and then prevail in market competition.
  TrueFalse

Are such preparations and undertakings something that you yearn to be a part of?
   

Do you need and desire to conceive, think through, work out, help, build, nurture, cultivate and promote just such new venture(s) from scratch, in collaborative interaction with others?
   

Might you be at all interested in working together with_ yours truly? _
    _
 
Are you committed to engaging with me, seriously and in any depth, in discussion of the prospect of our possibly working together?
   

Are you open, also, to free discussion with others who might also be interested in joining in?    

 

The following is inevitably a difficult question, because while the prospect of joining in during the proverbial "kitchen table" stage or phase of even the most promising, cutting edge, personally fulfilling, and potentially obscenely lucrative venture, while having every appeal and possible future advantage, must also reasonably entail expectation of such hardship as risk tolerance with regard to any interim commitment of time and effort.

If this is right for you, are you at least willing to consider joining and helping to form a first concept stage venture on an equity only basis, unpaid, initially, for eventual profit sharing, with no wages at least until we acquire Seed Capital? -Undertaking participation in the arduous process of forging whatever needed organization, and working out all the required framework and terms?     

 
 
 

 
 
Explain:

 
Most participants, due to their own financial needs and obligations, will only be able to do this part time, at least initially. Which is just fine.

Indeed, if all goes well, in starting together from scratch, effort demands, workloads and responsibilities, may be expected to begin at a light to moderate levels and then increase, building up over time, as whatever collaboration develops, moving towards fruition and formalization.

(Comment freely.)

TRUST

I tend to distance myself, minimizing contact, standing back and not getting involved, especially when tensions rise.

I like to secretively hedge my bets elsewhere, until such other prospects become distracting, I put less effort into the current undertakings, drift away and finally quit altogether.

Instead of trust, I prefer to cliquishly gang up with others to reinforce mistrust and build my reputation and influence.

I never go beyond my job description, no matter what reliance I have encouraged others to place in my lofty sense of commitment. Even when a project is down to the wire and my contribution will be catastrophically urgent, I just remember, it's not my department: By ‘wearing the hat’ of my rôle in interacting with others, I can hide my ordinary vulnerability behind my assertive professional facade. This also allows me to focus on building my competencies and build up my record if demonstrations of competence in my defined niche. By focusing, compartmentalization, stringently clarifying what I do or only say that I do and (often more importantly) what I do not do, I seek to pre-empt any criticism of all I omit or refuse to do, particularly for others, even while raising and then dashing expectations, promising the impossible or the unnecessary to weasel out of the most utterly minimal and indispensably crucial.

I am a trusting person!

I am not naive, but trust building is an indispensable effort.

Comment freely:

 

Which of the following best describes you and your own approach to processing new input:

My responses are utter non sequitur. I never bother to actually read before reacting. I only have an impulse to express myself, and whatever random input at a glance is simply my convenient Rorschach free association trigger stimulus, nothing more.
 
Much the same as above, except that no matter what you say, my responses somehow quickly return to one fixed idea or agenda with little variation.
 
I'm just deathly bored and aching lonely, yet, for all my pronounced superficial affability, by far too tragically guarded to cry out for help, indeed, for anything much more than the most secretively idle chit-chat and staling. Did that possibility ever occur to you, you heartless arrogant supercilious bastard? After all, just because I'm desperate for attention doesn't mean I actually give a shit.
 
I am a flagrant Antinationalist secretively beating about the bush and indignantly demanding blanket exemptions from accountability, consistent logic and Reality Testing for all of my own dogmatic, obscure and fanatical articles of faith and Paranormal claims that inform all my distorted views, animosity towards criticism, question begging, depraved indifference and destructive behaviors, willfully blind to all contradiction, Empirical, logical, moral or ethical. Humor me patiently as I insult your intelligence and offend all compassion, or else suffer my wrath! 
 
Shucks, howdy, I have precious little incentive to pay much attention nor to relate to you or your website, because, in actuality, I am not even remotely interested in the content, subject matter, nor at all contemplating such interaction as you propose, and certainly will never even consider your terms. I offer nothing of what you here solicit, nor do I seek nor value that which you have offered. Time is short, this is a numbers game, and people are only statistics. For the dammed must ever seek out the damned! I'm just some sort of slippery Sales Recruiter, Network Marketer, cult proselytizer, Cyber-pimp, or some other such unsavory and evasive ulterior agenda, buckaroo! 
 
No, I really am here to help, but I truly absolutely must charge something up front. That is simply how things are done.
[In that case, please READ THIS.]
 
When surfing a unfamiliar website, as guardian of the holy sanctity of html, I make a point never to use the intended browser, derive so much as one iota of joy from graphics, FX or other gimmicks, nor, especially, to allow myself to be distracted by actual content. I simply issue the wildest and most sweepingly purpose-defeating demands for everything be scrapped, dumped and changed completely, with no regard whatsoever for anything save the pristine purity of code!
 
When surfing an unfamiliar website, in response I demonstrate my innate superiority by unremittingly spewing forth picayune irrelevance, unrelenting abuse and ugly groundless accusation! Because I'm so well adjusted and cool with the in-crowd...
 
When surfing an unfamiliar website, I just throw up my hands in helplessness! And above all, never explain what's wrong or give the URL of whatever page I am complaining about or post online I respond to, no more, likewise, than I would ever, for example, excerpt the emails I answer, but only months later. And, naturally, I take great and wounded umbrage at all exasperated demands for context! I'm only trying to help, after all.
 
Even if I never find the wherewithal to navigate any other content what so ever, I will, nevertheless, unerringly home in and locate whatever the one particular iota of content, however tame, trivial or obscure, that will most offend my excruciatingly delicate sensibilities and save me from the need of ever pondering or discussing anything even remotely interesting, important or relevant, perpetually on hold until the world capitulates to me. For the children!
 
I never imagined that there are actually people who begin, first, by seizing upon any single point in a hypertext, to then construct their understanding of the whole, adding to their own picture as they move through the content. What an interesting notion! Me, I'm just happy to browse all of this fascinating content, which I don't yet understand. What, aren't I getting the gist of it? You mean, we're not making balloon animals? What, can it be that are we not communicating but merely bypassing?
 
I have so much to offer in response to your site, but I can never come to the point. The Universe, after all, is a riddle, and I am noting if not Universal! And so, by bombarding you with examples, marshalling copious illustrations and links, my message, surely will arise, Inductively, in all of it's splendor!

When surfing a unfamiliar website, I look for some introductory paragraph or two, usually at the top of the page, to explain whatever section my scrutiny has taken me to, and proceed from there. Otherwise, if need be, I try to ask intelligent questions and provide a proof reading note or two in order to point out whatever ambiguities that might remain so confounding. I even trouble to offer my user story coherently, in case of any whatever difficulties in navigation etc. Then I read, attentively, whatever response I receive and revisit the site again, to review any modifications. In this manner, both my own understanding and clarity on the Web for everyone, progress.

Never mind you having the temerity to screen me, you nut-job! Your website is so bizarre, you simply make me too nervous!
Answer: Then get a grip and put aside normative thinking only for the moment, then ask yourself why you feel so strongly.
Am I well intentioned and sincere?
Does my website suggest that I have any talent and ability to offer in working with you at all?
You are probably here because you asked me about my own expectation in collaboration. This questionnaire, in it's whimsical sarcasm, strives to answer just such questions. If we hit it off at all, then, in due course, we shall discuss in depth and intelligently, how and just what sort of image to present and exactly to whom. But what need have we of pretense only between ourselves? Indeed, as very few people agree on everything, what are the bare essentials regarding which agreement will actually be crucial? This questionnaire attempts to address that very burning issue.
This website is here, first of all, that we may connect as responsible creative thinkers. Let others fuss over decorum. This questionnaire pursues more urgent and substantial concerns. Issues likely to arise for you, as well, no matter who you end up collaborating with, and on whatever terms. So, pay attention! Let us compare filters. At very worst, I'm only trying to help you from my own strange experience, all what someone should have warned me! And I do need and value your input.

Indeed, what are your own responses, criticisms, suggestions, questions to the interlocking business proposals at http://www.FoolQuest.com?

Say what you think! Offer your sage wisdom.

What do you want?

How do you see yourself participating? What good are you? How can you help?

Make our vision your own! As a Co-Founder candidate, design your own position in the formation of new venture from scratch.

Or if your own primary interest is simply to participate in the open ongoing fiction writing collaboration, particularly just as a fun hobby (though even such may be hoped to illicit at least some modicum of dedication), then, by all means:     click here ...         

Are you sufficiently interested to sustain a dialogue long enough to reach understanding and come to terms, so that we can all work together?

This is a must! Without ongoing communication, creativity cannot be productively shared. So just be sure to hold up your end of the conversation. And this means, at the very least, making time as needed for a sustained email response pretty much on a daily basis, going point by point as may arise.

Or else the courtesy of explicit notification in case of any break, pause or cessation.

Would you agree to these stipulations?

   
 
  Elaborate as needed or desired:
  At any given time, of necessity there may be immediate internal distribution of correspondence, sometimes even broadened for the sake of expediting introductions among interested parties. Hence, suppose that you received an email response and noticed additional new email addresses in the C:c field. What would be your response?
Fie! My trust is already betrayed! [Raving Paranoid response]

Groovy! Networking new contacts! [Much better!]

Do you understand the importance and know how to use "REPLY ALL" functionality and the Cc: field in answering email, in order to keep the other addressees in the conversation as ever appropriate?
 
 
 
 
 
Miscommunication Competence and Conversational Adequacy
 
Does symbol manipulation trulyamplify or actuallytax your working memory?

Q. What is the crucial importance of posting conventions?

A. Quality interactivity online  generally still depends upon asynchronous text communication, private or public response to previous private or public messages by others, often excerpted or quoted for context.

The revolutionary quick turn around of electronic asynchronous text communication makes unprecedented actual conversation in typed correspondence possible!

For any in depth exchange or Dialectic, a very important aspect of quoting never to be underestimated, is how the quotes should indicate what sections or points of a message that any given remark replies to. Often there may be certain response to some sections or points of a message, and distinct other responses to about other sections or points even of the same message. And it will be crucial to see, readily, which response pertains to which point, in order to make much sense of any of it. And the best way to convey all of this clearly and distinctly, is to quote a little bit, interject some comments, quote some more, and then interject some comments specifically to that as well, and so on. Each answer in turn, follows the same method, and an entire written conversation unfolds, point by point, iteration by iteration.

Quotes should be indicated, automatically, by your email software or service, by a character at the beginning of each line, usually a '>' (greater than) sign or chevron, the right angle bracket or right brocket, in bare plain text, or by a blue bar in html that supports colors, sizes and fonts, etc.. or on some forums, by a range of different indications such indentation of the text. Thus, with each iteration, another such indicator is added at the beginning of the line, so that chronological order as well as intended sequitur will always be clearly indicated as the conversation proceeds.

These principles of the quoting conventions handed down from Usenet, even back from the days of Arpanet, are still applicable in any mode of asynchronous text communication, electronic forums, message posting boards, list servers, egroups, and email, etc.

The advantages of Usenet’s quoting conventions
correctly and with proper attribution or:
What do you mean "my reply is upside-down" ?
Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
Writing Conversation: Analysis of email Speech Events

excellence in Miscommunication Competence and Conversational Adequacy

PS. Also please always be sure to include citation of the full URL web address, a clickable hyperlink to any discrete materials or resources on the Web as ever comes to be referenced in discussion. 

So, have you any notable communications impediment, such as any difficulty with the English language or learning disabilities with formatting multiple iteration of email response?
 
Are you fluent in English? 
And are you competent in abiding by the posting conventions?
 
 
Whenever I am told something I do not understand or didn't quit catch I will:
 
Nod my head like a bobble and grin idiotically while vaguely grunting "uhuh..."
Pay attention, interrupting and asking questions as we go so as to keep up to speed and share my best intelligent contribution.
 
Likewise, in reading any part of an email but failing to fully understand:
 
The only conceivable reason for anything to be that complicated or unusual can only be sheer unmitigated pretense of superiority to make people like me feel stupid and puny. Therefore, feel my vengeful wrath!
If I don't understand, then I'll have nothing to say and I won't need to answer at all. So, what's the big deal?
Once it is clear from my blank expression and loud silence, that I remain quite in the dark, it becomes entirely your responsibility to simply persist in repetition and variation, even without effort or feedback on my part whatsoever, until the light dawns for me.
I'll ignore that part and just go with the flow, change the subject or take another tack. 
It will be enough to simply jot down at the top of my email reply that I didn't fully understand everything. Then it becomes your problem.
I will interject, responsibly, inserting notations into my email response as I read, just as if I had the sender right next to me to answer, conversationally. Much like a teacher with a red pen making corrections and comments, I will interject questions and other responses as ever needed so as to be specific as to whatever ambiguities I need clarified, how and why, indicating in detail, point by point and explaining specifically what about each of the aforesaid points might be in any way unclear or confusing, and why so; and to question and to persist until everything becomes crystal clear.
 
And upon receiving an email reply properly formatted in the manner as described directly above, I shall:
 
Ignore the cheeky bastard!
Launch into an even more unintelligible screed!
Disparage all those who fail to plumb the depth of my grandiose Obscurantism.
Impugn motive.
Interject answers to each point or question, and clarify everything to the best of my ability, iteration by iteration, until lucid communication is achieved. To a) quickly clarify whatever ambiguity, b) get any sort of meaningful feedback in return, c) help in revision and to polish promotional draft texts for wider dissemination and outreach, and d) to move discussion forward into serious planning and agenda as, hopefully, might become appropriate if all goes well.
 
       excellence in
                       Miscommunication Competence and
                                                          Conversational Adequacy
 

 
Agorics is an innovative approach to computing, that simulates the free market. Because, as with economics, in computing, the free market (but with some sort of regulation within the rule of law) remains the most efficient distributor of resources for maximization of productivity. Traditional computing runs on a first come, first serve, basis. And so, everything frequently bogs down with trivial requests, while the more important work waits at the back of the line, the top of the stack. But with Agorics, higher priority processes get more simulated money in order to bid on "auction" for processor time, RAM and disk space, etc.. And sub-processes often shared by different client processes, draw consulting fees, simulated money with which, likewise, to bid for the needed resources. Meanwhile, even low priority processes none the less too important to be allowed to starve, to grind to a halt and die completely, are subsidized with just enough money to keep them alive until they are needed and must respond to whatever emergency or opportunity as ever may arise, changing priorities and, therefore, resource allocation.

Now, economics can be applied anywhere there is scarcity, to any process entailing resource allocation, not just computing, especially, as in Agorics, an information or communications process, the proverbial market place of ideas. Moreover, in any context other than, perhaps, computer operations, it is often falsely assumed that demand is as straightforward as supply. It is not. And that is part of the many problems with achieving optimal allocation and distribution of vital resources, even time and attention just from one another, directly. Because demand is also a matter of human behavior and the transmission or replication thereof.

In a society that is at all subject to conditioned heteronomy, doubt is made awkward and questions remain unasked because responsibility is such anathema. And this retards change from the routine. And also, in such an heteronymous society, incomprehension and ignorance are no less awkward. Moreover, unfamiliar ideas, especially new ones, are seldom clear at first blush. And question is usually the only possible or sensible response in the face of incomprehension and ignorance, particularly as regards unfamiliar ideas, especially new ones, or just unclear expression of any kind or for any reason.
 
Without curiosity and Criticality, without a Dialectic of active listening followed by polemics, without rounds of painstaking question, dissection by counter question and clarification to best inform the attack and defense of competing hypotheses, crucially important communications are often greeted only with a loud silence, and everything grinds to a dead halt at the threshold of the unknown. The refusal to question kills all progress by utterly starving, still born, any process of inquiry and discovery whatsoever. And so, practical application never arises. Consequently, opportunities are lost and avoidable disasters befall us all. 
 
Comment as needed...
 
 
Webmail offers convenient accessibility for the user on the go, but often at significant compromise in robust functionality as compared to the standard email client software.
But the minimum email tools requirements for our collaboration will naturally include whatever email solution on your part that does not loose, mangle or de-format correspondence upon receipt, reply or transmission; and also some reliable means to receive even large file attachments intact, as and if need be. This is your responsibility.
 
Do you agree to these stipulations?
 
And is such already currently implemented on your end?
 
Comment as needed...
 
 

 

 

Were are you going?
Again, if your own primary interest is simply to participate in the open ongoing fiction writing collaboration, particularly just as a fun hobby (though even such may be hoped to illicit at least some modicum of dedication), then, by all means, click here ...

 
Of the interrelating proposals, have you any particular interest in new business models on the frontiers of advanced automated Sociometry?  
    

Until such technological potential is realized, online and available, we all must conduct and optimize our own interpersonal networking, as best we can. And everybody has their own different style. 

So, if you answered in the affirmative to the question above, that, yes, you are responding in regards to new business models on the frontiers of  advanced automated Sociometry, then with whom are you seeking to establish contact and, ultimately, to collaborate with? Please check the answer which best describes your intent:  

Attention: Aaron Agassi, please respond.    

Attention: Douglas Wilson, please respond.   

I hope to be working, individually, with each of you.  

I see us all working together closely, and I am interested in setting out to help develop a successful and effective working group. 

I am undecided, and need to find out more.   

And feel free to consult the CASA business report.

Thank you. Your input will be redirected as per your indicated preference. 

 

 
 
Of the interrelating proposals, have you any interest in those pertaining to Space Activism and the application of Space Technology?

Regarding the Green Pro-Space Agenda, to the attention of Aaron Agassi.

Technical issue regarding the solar orbital furnace proposal, to the attention of Jerry Scovel.

Add comment as desired:

Thank you. Your input will be redirected as per your request.

 
Are you making contact with regard to a proposal of your own?
Indeed, much of the collaborative effort showcased on this site has been initiated from the proposals of others. So, don't be shy!
Please give some explanation below.
A URL would be ideal. Or perhaps even the subject heading to look for in an email under separate cover, if properly detailed explanation is too much at this moment.
 
Supplemental reading: What's My Business Idea Worth?
Discuss:
 
 
 

Whom do you serve?

GETTING REAL

In particular, issues of control need to be explicit, as ambiguity and disagreement, incidental and innocent or deliberate and dissembling, will tend to be no less damaging than heavy handed tyranny outright. Hence, the investment of time, effort and attention into preliminaries to clarify powers, responsibilities and their motivations, so often neglected, no less often turns out to be crucial.                                                                     

So, which of the following best describes you:

A) Money, money, money, money, money! That's what I want... !

B) Money doesn't matter to me. I can make do with little.
Other things are more important. 
 
C) This is more than just an arbitrary personal life style question:
Obviously Capital, connections and influence are among the important resources that could make a difference to advance just about any major project.
 
D) Others will deal with all of that!
My grand designs will come to fruition my the confluence of events without me actually polluting my soul with commerce at this juncture.

 

Additional comments:
 
 
GETTING EVEN REALER
Are you a cult of one?

 

The Web is simply overrun by monosyllabic wanna be authors expecting effortless sonnets from sheer Stream of Consciousness, would be Captains of Industry acknowledging  no need to balance the books, and mass movements with no mass and less movement. For such are the delusions of impatience!

Beyond vastly impractical and counterproductive fanatical sociopolitical agenda fixations and just whopping Big Lies, articles of faith in whatever sort of dogmatic cult ideology may often even include antirational paranormal claims, but perhaps most commonly bankrupt models of human nature and society, while, likewise, the deepest and most counter productive personal delusion and denial are often characterized by a marked reluctance to at all observe, empirically test, research existing bodies of knowledge, or consult with others, but regarding some individual personal hypothesis, technique or procedure of relating to and influencing others. Persisted in, all such tend to perpetuate failure and even disaster, no less than any other sort of wishful thinking. In the worst cases, the question beggar, individual or collective, instead blames others, individuals, groups or institutions, who have not responded as so blithely predicted, who would not be bullied or conned, who did not respond and performed as they "ought" to, by whatever self-serving one sided pragmatic or moral rationalization.

Whereas, all to often, the ugly truth is that people often will simply not be helped, much less bullied or conned, instead moving by their own moral or pragmatic compass or whatever other not so secret customs or motivation and obvious priorities, sensible or otherwise. And that forging collaboration is profoundly difficult. Cavalier dismissive hand-waving just won't do. Expertise and capability in all manner of interpersonal interaction will be a crucial human resource recruitment need, but wasted if it will only be disregarded, rejected out of hand by self absorbed lunacy.

Beyond merely raising or suggesting further questions, a begged question presents a proposition that needs to be logically demonstrated and/or supported by evidence as if it did not, simply assuming the validity and/or truth of an assertion. When a question is begged, either a premise is simply assumed to be true without warrant or else what should be logically proven valid or evidenced as actually true is instead implicitly taken for granted or imbedded in fallacious circular reasoning wherein the conclusion is also premise. An inadveritently begged question can turn a supporting argument into a testable hypothesis. But seldom so an article of faith, of cult ideology or grandiose personal delusion and denial all alike.

Hence, in the colloquial, question begging implies deliberately and dishonestly smuggling the conclusion into the premise in order to side step or evade whatever question begged. Indeed, hypersensitivity and bullying outright are not uncommon in the face of awkward questions and heterodoxy. If the question beggar cannot attain consensus, then they will often resentfully seek to extort at least some tactful silence. However, to be businesslike entails the most rigorous and rational scrutiny of assumptions. And for this, all must remain open to question. But the dishonest Dogmatism of willful question begging defeats openness.

For the sake of whatever collaborative effort, do you agree to the need to openly and rationally examine assumptions, assertions, implications and practices -your own in particular- regarding not only reality in general, but more specifically, procedures in successfully dealing with others to meet out goals and attain our desires?
   
Got any problem with people who are just argumentative?
   

 

 

Cooperation/collaboration means:

Everyone in the totality of being playing each our role somehow, and it all come to fruition as destiny manifests.

Compiling extensive data links so that action in the World at Large will arise organically with improved understanding. Because, truly, collaboration is ultimately naught but knowledge sharing.

No more than division of solitary labor.

Consistently uncritical validation. Unquestioning loyalty.

Committed and sustained effort and interaction, continually building upon one another's input into the same project.

Exchanging information, altering activities, sharing resources, and enhancing the capacity of other individuals for mutual benefit and to achieve a common purpose.

Protecting one another's interests.

Together building and then serving as a reciprocal web of support in whatever common undertaking.

Responsibility and reliability in the face of cross-functional task/outcome interdependencies. Commitment to tasks that are crucial to other tasks undertaken by somebody else, even reciprocally, in order to assure any chance whatsoever of any desired outcome of collaboration over all, especially where chances of success at all are enhanced or actually even require that all such tasks be executed in sequence.

"From each according to their abilities, and to each according to their needs." A trade of sorts, assisting one another in a timely and concerted fashion, as ever needed, such that complimentary skills and resources fill gaps and smooth stumbling blocks so that work will advance in common cause and ever be accomplished.

 

 

Business planning seeks to maximize gains and minimizes losses. Hence, the very essence of business planning is in risk management. Hence, for the business layperson, the wanna-be entrepreneur, one greatest of major stumbling blocks to concrete business planning is innumeracy, an intrinsic misapprehension of risks.

Innumeracy is difficulty in thinking with numbers. Statistical innumeracy is the inability to think with numbers that represent uncertainties. Ignorance of risk, miscommunication of risk, and clouded thinking are all deadly forms and manifestations of innumeracy. Like illiteracy, innumeracy is curable. However, innumeracy is not simply a cognitive deficiency inside an unfortunate mind, but cultural and in part resultant from inadequate outside representations of numbers. Hence, in that regard, innumeracy is entirely curable from the outside.

Indeed, miscommunication of risks is a form of innumeracy wherein one knows and understands the risks of some actual or hypothetical event, action or choice, yet may find oneself at something of a loss as how to how to communicate these so that others will also understand. And various representations that facilitate comprehension may help overcome just such communications barriers.

By every contrast with the standard hierarchical dominance and compartmentalization of established corporate life, in any entrepreneurial management team or mastermind/affinity group, the first most crucial role of the "suits," the money specialists, the indispensable project social engineers, in the drive to success, will be as the shared resource, intensive awareness and guidance of expense and benefit quantification in business planning and collaborative management, choices and decision making.

fascinating repugnant
 
Dolt! I am one of those "suits!"


 

 

At any hoped for prospect of establishing contact to work with an MBA, lawyer, lobbyist or other such social engineer to help prepare and open the way to a chance at Venture Capital, connections, even political influence or any other such helpful resources, I would be:

a) You must never forget that I am the Prima Donna, and temperamental genius must always be catered to, whatever it takes. You need to persevere as the go between, and work according to my timing and my inclination. This the Internet, and, therefore, I can have no accountability. Fuck you all in advance!

b) To be honest, I would be troubled, because, truth to tell, I just am not comfortable with them "suits"! And so, there is simply no guarantee how I'd feel, how I might respond, and what I'd do or not. Basically, I'm just a whiner!

c) I am always polite, treat everyone as equals and never bite the hand that feeds me. I will behave and respond as seems to me reasonable. *  

d) I'd be Fuck'n thrilled!!!

  Because, while in a rational world, the crucial importance of my life's work would be readily recognized, in the real world, I understand full well that we need those who can help in making connections and acquiring needed resources far more than they actually need us, and getting them and keeping them onboard and giving them the input and assistance with our concept as and how and when they know they need it and accepting and following their guidance in facilitating our aims is all crucial.

After all, it's not what you know but who you know -or, rather, who knows you! ...as the saying goes.

Moreover, however scummy their professions, then by the very same token it follows that any of them visionary enough to come to our support is already an unusual person. Indeed, far from trivializing whatever concept, they'd have to really grasp the potential of an idea in order to actually be motivated to come onboard and work on spec.

 

Dolt! I am one of those "scum bag" social engineers!

e) In my professional capacity, I know what I'm doing and it's all the same, from one account to another. (E.g., a tort's a tort regardless of the situation, marketing toys is no different regardless of particular licensing, etc., it's all routine.)
 
f) The interesting thing about my work (or else should be, damn it!) is in learning and adapting what I do to the needs and goals of the client and creatively translating different projects and situations into my own discipline or field of endeavor to solve new problems. 
 

 

For decades now, the obstacles to outer space and to ending hunger and so forth, have never been technological but entirely social. What this means is that Geeks are nothing more than slackers who love to deal with the easy cut and dry part of any project, and to leave the heavy lifting and calculated risk to the Suits. Which is alright, if only the Geeks recognize with due gratitude and cooperation, the Suits who open doors for them.

At the same time, conversely in this equation, the influence peddling money grubbing Suits spinning such Byzantine process out of thin air, are really nothing more than servile intermediary between technology and the market. And without these salient Ontologies, of the technology on one end and the market on the other, those damn Suits would be no more grounded in reality than Theologians counting angels on the head of a pin!

And for example by way of further illustration to the point, no one reaches for the stars more literally that Richard Branson and Burt Ruttan. And certainly all operations of Virgin Galactic are channeled together into the common goal of the company.

Indeed, we may all rest assured that there is neither a letter of Richard Branson's business planning that isn't carried out save but to meet the needs of by Burt Ruttan's engineering, nor likewise a single stroke of Burt Ruttan's engineering designs that doesn't rise to meet the needs of Richard Branson's business planning. Otherwise, they'd literally never get off the ground!

The wretchedly pigheaded fantasy that Geeks and Suits or indeed any other category of specialist, will ever get anywhere by shunning one another with contempt, is made a lie by the simple truth that compartmentalization is a manifestation of sheer irrelevancy so endemic to the normative death throws of systems. Or when arriving early, such is the frequent herald of the still birth of pipedreams.

Additional comments:

 

STRATEGY

A great idea is enough.

The key is to promote and manage stock and then get out quickly at maximum valuation.

The opportunity is to be found very generally in a demonstrably huge market.

Once we get that big Venture Capital check in the bank to get over the next hump in development, everything else will fall into place.

Only once we have pretty much everything else worked out, will anyone ever invest. And the key is in clear added value to whatever specific target market(s)

 

.Any further comment:

 

 

And who do you trust?

MORALE AND ESPRIT DE CORPS:
Do unto others...

Apathy and acrimony are contagious. And I detest being trapped in the middle! When problems arise within a group, can I count on your support in trying to facilitate, encourage participation and resolve problems? Will you speak up when there is a crisis? Will you also be persistent with other people involved? Can you be counted on to assert yourself and lend active support as personality conflicts and other bottle necks arise, or will you squeamishly and passively drop all of that responsibility in just anybody else's lap?

As a participant in collaborative effort, should you commit to join in, reciprocity and cross-functional task/outcome interdependency will become job one, especially where chances of success at all are enhanced or actually even require that all such tasks be executed in sequence. The most immediate priority of good faith must be whatever reasonable and diligent effort or response another participant in collaborative effort needs of you in order to be able to continue their own interdependent tasks in turn as smoothly as possible and without needless delay. After that, second priority is advancement of any larger vision of whatever mission or outcome as a whole. Only then, in case of any whatever demands of the previous other two priorities, comes the third priority which is whatever one's own largely solitary division of labor or specialty on one's own schedule, even if that is what generally continues to take most of one's time and effort in whatever joint affinity action or venture.

In summation, thou shalt not let thy partners in collaborative effort down, nor leave them in the lurch! 

agree | disagree

Yea, verily, and thou shalt expect and righteously demand as much in return for thyself, as a partner in collaborative effort, reciprocally.

agree | disagree

Yea, verily, nor suffer thy partners in collaborative effort to let thee down nor leavest thou in the lurch.

agree | disagree

Yea, verily, nor standest by in silence to suffer thy partners in collaborative effort to so iniquitously misbehave towards one another! Problems and issues must be confronted, conflicts and antipathies diffused in order to resolve and avert needless crisis.

agree | disagree

Should I ever find myself troubled with questions, concerns or misgivings pursuant to our collaboration, I will speak out and press the matter until resolution, never to dissemble nor to drag my feet.

  agree | disagree

 

In our imperfect world, realistically, recruitment may tend to be an arduous trial an error. And so, when, inevitably, one or another crucial participant starts flaking out on us one way or another and the entire deal threatens to unravel:
a) I will pitch in to redouble our efforts at whatever remedy, damage control and even replacement recruitment as need be, and try, try again. With such reciprocal commitment, everyone will know that flaking out can only ruin one's own prospects, without so easily scuttling the entire venture for everyone else.
b) Are you kidding? I'm not gonna do anything except sit on my hands and then maybe bail out myself, likewise! I don't stick out my neck for nobody...
 
 
 
If some arrogant know-it-all turns up on whatever our turf (physical of virtual) seemingly claiming/showing off some allegedly or implicitly deeper grasp or neglected skill set pertinent to any aspect of our undertakings:
a) I will shuck and jive, vaguely pretend we know exactly what we are doing, sulk, fume and stonewall, instigate behind the scenes, and then, if he or she still won't take a hint, go ballistic!  (After all, the most importation skill set superceding all other talents and abilities are social skills. And the greatest treasure among all personal assets is humility. After all, these are eternal verities readily validated by any insecure and volatile Conformist angry mod that one would ever choose consult! Clearly, anyone who ever ruffles my feathers has thereby irrefutably and irredeemably demonstrated their deficiencies in social skill and humility. Unless, of course, they can dominate and intimidate me first, into sucking up. Otherwise, in the very name of decency, obviously they should be looking for someone to suck up to themselves.)
b) I will show every courtesy, do due diligence, hear what they've got to say, question in detail, scrutinize whatever they have to show, and then do my utmost to help evaluate whatever recruitment and / or networking prospect for any possible advantage to better our over all chances of success. (Hey, why not? Let's rise to the challenge! Egotism can be healthy, sportsmanlike, confident, competitive, productive, honest, well humored and fun! Let's always be glad to to be shown up and find out whatever we don't know and are unprepared for, sooner better than later.
 
 
Explain yourself immediately!!
 
 
 
How Affinity Action suffers from Passive Hostility and denial:

Barring coercion or dependency, individuals involved in unreciprocated exchanges will be motivated to withdraw from such interaction and choose better, if and as open to them. If whatever collective project survives at all in the first place, Tangible Costs will include turnover and reduced efficiency. Even litigation should things escalate to that point, entailing costs: attorney fees; settlement costs; jury awards; appeal costs... Stress and errors. Talent Flight of best and brightest as they seek less hostile and better responsive projects to join instead -- in such an event, dummies and political operatives will be all that remain -- lost capacity to respond and innovate

Intangible Costs are likely to include damaged reputation as conflict spills over into evil gossip, instigation and Relational Bullying in any larger social context. Reputation as a silly clique of fools and social climbers accomplishing nothing. Bad public relations from high-profile feuds. Yet more passive sabotage by fearful collaboration participants who know no alternatives given failure to screen, purge or punish the tyrant(s). Resistance to initiative because of prevailing mistrust.

It makes no sense to incur these preventable costs in this competitive market for capable and motivated participants in collaboraton!! By tolerating passive hostility and denial, not only viable function at all, but excellent recruitment and retention advantages are sacrificed.
 
 
 
Even in ancient Athens, Socrates made himself respected by some but quite unpopular among the powerful, simply by pointing out how experts in anyone field often become foolishly arrogant so as to believe or to behave as if they thereby knew everything, or at least everything important, esteeming whatever their own specialty as supreme, and all others as insignificant. Whereas, it might be the more prudent simply to admit when one doesn't know without making such a fuss.
 
Indeed, even today, it is all to common to hear the specialists in any particular discipline complain bitterly of being expected to nursemaid others in whatever enterprise. And they will be even more hostile towards any notion needing to be nursemaided themselves, in matters beyond whatever their own specialty, let alone integrating different disciplines.
 
But the model presented here in this very questionnaire is one of close-knit entrepreneurial reciprocal nursemaiding, so to speak.
 
Could you yourself ever consider embracing such a paradigm?
 

 

 

Identifying Strengths & Weaknesses

The starting point for developing new business ventures from scratch lies inside the prospective entrepreneur no less than in the marketplace, laboratory, business plan etc.

It is our strengths and weaknesses which should dictate the areas in which to develop ideas and the likely scale & scope of any venture. At the end of the day, support for any business by financiers, suppliers, customers etc. will also be a vote of confidence in your abilities to make it successful.

We must build on our strengths and shore up, surmount or work around our weaknesses, and possibly cut our cloth to meet our main limitations.

For example, there is little point in searching for capital-intensive or knowledge-based ideas if, between us, we will have slim/no prospects of raising the necessary capital or if our pool of educational background is unsuitable.

Of course we have all heard stories of garage-startups by school drops-out which attracted venture capital and eventually became mega-businesses, but we might not hear so much about the huge numbers of failures, precisely because that would not be remarkable or uncommon.

 

Check motives as applicable to you:

  • Frustrated in my current career because I'm not really challenging my personal skills and abilities to the fullest.
  • Seek growth experience and resume enhancement
  • Looking for a new, more rewarding career
  • Dreamed of something like this for years!
  • Thinking of a new or second career.
  • Desire to work from home or work at home to simplify my life.
  • Want to do something extraordinary and fun with my life.
  • Yearn for command over my own destiny and real input.
  • Destined to change the world!

 

From what vantage is your approach? Are you:

  • An inventor who has a product/service idea?
  • An innovator who has developed a new product/service?
  • Out of work and want to create a job for yourself?
  • An aspiring/entrepreneur who wishes to be involved in new venture creation?
  • A manager who wishes to participate in the development of a new business?

Be especially aware that inventors and innovators do not necessarily make good business people.

Areas where you should make honest assessments of your strengths and weaknesses include the following:

Educational background

  • Any general or special business or technical qualifications?

 

  • Do you have a knowledge of finance & marketing?

 

  • Are you up-to-date with business-related issues?

 

Financial strengths

  • Have you influence or access to Venture Capital? How much, how easily, what conditions and when?

Commitment

  • Why do you really want to become involved in the creation of a new venture?
  •  
  • Are you in reasonable health? Are you maintaining reasonable health? Will you commit to getting enough sleep to be of any use?
  •  
  • What are your other commitments (demands upon your time and energy)? Can you even make time for whatever venture(s) in question? 
  •  
  • Will others who have any claim on you fully approve of and support our collaboration and proposals? 

  •  

Expertise & interests

  • Do you have insights into any business sectors or trades?

  • What are you good at or like doing?
  • Do you have a hobbies/interests/talents which could conceivably be commercialized?

Personal qualities

  • Are you a resourceful, energetic and motivated person? Elaborate:

 

  • Have you a capacity to take lots of knocks and bounce back?  Elaborate:
  • Are you realistic and practical?  Elaborate:
  • Are you hard working?  Elaborate:
  • What do you dislike doing?

 

Prior experience

 

  • Have you done anything special, exceptional or unusual?
  • What skills or expertise have you?

External contacts, resources etc.

  • What contacts have you in finance, business etc.?
  • Have you or any of your own contacts access to any under-utilized resources?

 

  • Do you know people who might help give us a start?

Don't be afraid to ask other people to help assess your strengths and weaknesses.

To help surmount one's own weaknesses, one might consider the option of forming an entrepreneurial or activist team. And that is the focus of this website. But beware of trying to work with people you don't like or respect or can't trust.

 

 
"ALL FOR ONE AND
ONE FOR ALL!"

 

*How do you define reasonableness?

a) According to personal convenience. I will do as much as will not put me out, because I must prioritize and put my important goals first.

b) According to honor and commitment between partners in collaborative effort to one another. I will always go out of my way to reciprocate, aid, support and better equip the efforts of whom so ever we should ever encourage or allow to trouble themselves on behalf of our grand designs.  

 

How shall we define our working relationships?

a) Everything and Everyone in Each Their Place. We each must focus on our own specialized part in things, which will all come together as history unfolds. Any cooperation, per se, must be entirely spontaneous. Agreements are an imperfect social technology. If you spontaneously do for me, and then I do not in due course spontaneously reciprocate, then this is no indication what so ever of any neurotic self absorbed or dishonest exploitative ulterior cross purpose agenda on my own part, but, rather, only proves that you first need to accomplish more by yourself in order to impress me, on top of continuing helping out and kissing my ass.

b) The Ideal Solution May Arise Outside of One's Own Field. I will "break out of the box", either taking more active interest in the specialized work of any other participant, or else we will build trust so that I may surrender whatever degree of control in another person's field, and be happy to be as helpful to them as is asked of me, demanding as much in return, adaptive, ad hoc interactions, so that, together each our goals will be accomplished. And I look forward to such a rewarding experience.

 

I wanna be:

a) Bossed around and ignored

b) Logistically supported and respected

 

How do you define commitment?

a) In such terms as how so ever I see fit, being that only I can ever fathom the fixated dedication with which I burn for my own vision and ideals.

b) Interpersonally and actively, among participants in collaborative effort, to empower and better equip one another in group effort of reciprocal logistical support.

 

Would you actually relish the opportunity to take an ongoing active interest in orientation, in learning about and familiarizing yourself with the different general and specialized efforts and inputs of each of your fellow participants in collaborative effort?
Would you actually relish the opportunity to take an ongoing active interest in opening yourself to assist and better equip partners in collaborative effort to do likewise, reciprocally?
Would you actually relish the opportunity to take an active interest, drop everything and bend over backwards to graciously and enthusiastically assist or advise a fellow participant in collaborative effort as ever needed, particularly whenever any sort of cross-functional interdisciplinary task or problem arises, and a combination of respective skill sets and resources may immediately be required?
Would you actually relish the opportunity to take an active interest, drop everything and bend over backwards to graciously and enthusiastically help court a new prospect?
Would you actually relish the opportunity to take an active interest, drop everything and bend over backwards to graciously and enthusiastically help make a newly joining partner participant in collaboratoion feel welcomed?

 


What is your
executive style
?

To maintain dictatorial rule and never ask anyone else involved for suggestions. This way all the glory will be mine. Of course, our participants in collaborative effort will not tend to do their best, nor rush to correct obvious errors, and they will desert us by and by. But then having to continually network for new collaboration resource is just part of the job.

After all, it is my risk, sacrifice vision and commitment that embodies all promise, so of course I must make all key decisions. All others involved are mere tools to get the job done, easily discarded if they break or wear out. Besides, caring about people just clouds the harsh realities of true visionary commitment.

All others involved are either only using me for their own selfish motives, or else, if they are altruistic, then they won't mind in any case. For success, they'll take the credit, but otherwise, they'll never admit their worthless inadequacy.

To serve. Initially, we must function without the resources of established big organizations. And so, I understand full well that compartmentalization is simply not a viable option. There is nothing yet to dominate, micromanage or compartmentalize!

I know my field, but only others understand the application thereof as dictated by their own tasks and responsibilities. Therefore each of our job description, including my own, must continually revise itself to to empower, fully support and better equip the efforts and abet the needs of each of our fellow participant in collaborative effort in addition to one's own tasks, especially where chances of success at all are enhanced or actually even require that all such tasks be executed in sequence. No matter how expert and visionary any one of us may be. And so, I look forward to putting myself at the disposal of my partners in collaborative effort and being guided by them to aid, better equip and facilitate their efforts however best I can (and shall expect no less in return) because I realize full well that Entrepreneurial new venture creation is by nature a close working interdisciplinary effort at preparation to risking the unknown.

For without great rewards to bestow, how else can I bind anyone to common cause, save by giving of myself? And what hope for great success against all odds can there be save by nurturing faith in one another? What is more important than people, at the inception when people and their dedication are the sole resource? For this we must all be reciprocally accountable, and, without reservation I will bend over backwards to give 110% the utmost of my assistance and support, no less priority than to entirely my own life's work, however particular or solitary that has been up until now.

Any collaboration against the odds, after all, must be no less dedicated in order to succeed.

 

Additional comments:

 

 

 







Contact:
Aaron Agassi

Phone:
(617) 628-2339
email:
aaronagassi@comcast.net


Homepage:
http://www.FoolQuest.com
 
 
Copyright Aaron Agassi 2002 - 2009    

 
After answering all the questions, click the "submit"
button below to complete the application.

Email response will be prompt.