08 Dec 2004 | Matthew Oliphant said...

This would have been handy yesterday. In the meeting I was in. In the meeting where there were 15 other people. 15 other people who were more interested in the planning session rather then one dope's "private" phone conversation.

Is saying, "Shutthefuckup," Business Casual if I append a "please?"

Maybe it would be nicer to say, "That's why they invented voice mail."

08 Dec 2004 | Ryan C. said...

Is it strange that I'm seriously considering printing these & handing them out?

08 Dec 2004 | Brad Hurley said...

If I get a friend of mine to translate these into French, could you (Coudal) plunk that into the same design? That would be lovely and very useful where I live!

08 Dec 2004 | Sean Devine said...

These remind me of the Road Rage Cards that I got my wife for Christmas. It's the same idea applied to bad driving.

Really, really funny.

08 Dec 2004 | Chris S said...

Need some bumper stickers, too, expressing the same kinds of sentiments for the people eating, talking, and reading while driving.

Even though I don't allow bumper stickers on our vehicles, I might make an exception for that.

08 Dec 2004 | Matthew Oliphant said...

Need ones for:

1) smoking people (not Don of course),
2) pregnant women to hand to other people who touch their stomachs without asking (a section that states "I'm not pregnant." would be good), and
3) muggers. because who doesn't hate a rude mugger?

08 Dec 2004 | Brad Hurley said...

On a more serious note, people should be careful about actually handing these out to anyone they don't already know...I hate to think of what could happen to someone if they gave one of these cards to a person with no sense of humor and a good pair of fists or a concealed weapon. It's sad, but true...people have been killed for less.

08 Dec 2004 | Coudal said...

My advice is to hand one to someone and get away before they read it. Cowardly, yet still effective. Bring on the French Brad...

08 Dec 2004 | Solomon said...

This is going to be so huge!!!! I will hand out quite a few here in Cali. Especially at the bookstore of all places....

08 Dec 2004 | Uptoyou said...

These are like the Urban Asshole Notification Cards from Glarkware (he has some great shirts too).

08 Dec 2004 | Mike D. said...

Very very nice!

Yo Couds, when are you going to offer an RSS feed for your new stuff? I don't mean full-text or anything, but just some sort of notification that there is something new on the site. Spontaneously checking someone's front page is so 2003.

08 Dec 2004 | Don Schenck said...

OLIPHANT! You ... argh!

The Marlboro man lived to be 54; George Burns lived to be 100. You do the math.

I want one for pushy car salespeople.

08 Dec 2004 | Brad Hurley said...

I've been sending the PDF around, people love 'em. One question that keeps coming up though: nobody seems to understand the one that says "Outside" Voices Please.

What DOES that mean? Is this a Chicago thing?

08 Dec 2004 | Sara said...

I'm definitely going to print out a few of those and take them with me to university. I'm amazed at the number of people who think that it's okay to have a long and loud cellphone conversation in the middle of the library or in a lecture theater.

I don't get the one about "outside" voices either though...

08 Dec 2004 | Dan S said...

I realize that this righteous anger is primarily towards people who are talking loudly, and especially towards those talking where nobody should be talking at all.

But is there anything wrong with talking in a normal voice in a public place where people normally have conversations with each other? Like on a bus, or while walking down the street? It even seems preferable to a normal conversation, since the rest of the world hears only half the dialogue.

Its fun to make fun of evil yuppies, but sometimes it verges on the unfair/obnoxious.

08 Dec 2004 | Bob said...

"Outside Voices" is, I believe, an opposite take on the phrase "Inside voices" which many parents use with their children who are being very loud in a public building or other place. My wife and I use it on our 5-year-old all the time. Works like a charm. Usually.

08 Dec 2004 | Jim Coudal said...

'Outside voices' was supposed to be 'inside voices' and now it is. A bit of miscommunication between the CP HQ and the Draplin Factory Floor.

Here's the CP Fresh Signals feed:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/CoudalFreshSignals

I usually make a note in there when there's something new elsewhere at the site, but I forgot today, until just now.

09 Dec 2004 | roar said...

you know, they did a study and found out volume has nothing to do with why people are bothered by cellphones. rather, it's because you only hear half the conversation and in turn your mind is forced to pay attention because it thinks you're being talked to.

09 Dec 2004 | UltraBob said...

Can I send in a Japanese version of it to compliment the French one?

09 Dec 2004 | Don Schenck said...

roar -- who is "they". "They" did a study? Who? Where? When? What color ... no ... wait ... the color of the cell phone doesn't matter.

As long as people are not talking too loud, I don't mind.

Societal Evolution -- Don't Fight It! :-)

09 Dec 2004 | kev said...

what's with the harsh language all of a sudden? If I didn't know better, I'd be offended. ;)

09 Dec 2004 | Keith said...

I believe this is the study he's referring to.

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040412.html

09 Dec 2004 | Don Schenck said...

Keith -- thanks. Wow ... fascinating.

09 Dec 2004 | Brad Hurley said...

In his article about why cellphones are irritating, Nielsen wrote that the problem seems to be that people pay more attention when they hear only half a conversation. But that's speculation: this study doesn't provide any clear evidence to support such a conclusion. It looks like there were factors that the researchers didn't/couldn't control for, such as perceptions and prejudices that people may already have toward cellphone users. Many of us have been subjected to so many loud cellphone users in public places that we may be predisposed to be bothered by anyone talking on a cellphone, regardless of whether they're talking loudly or not. This study doesn't seem to have accounted for that possibility, although I agree that it may be harder for us to tune out a one-sided conversation. On the other hand, I find it pretty easy to tune out a radio announcer, which is kind of like listening to a one-way conversation, so I'm not sure we're hard-wired to pay more attention to one person talking than to two people having a conversation. Maybe we just haven't gotten used to it yet, wheras we've had a long time to get used to tuning out radio announcers.