One of the highlights of Monday night's Lowell Downtown Neighborhood Association meeting (held at Athenian, by the way, which was a great venue) was hearing from Janette and Robert Nason, who are about to open the Market Street Market at 95 Market Street by the first of March.
Like you, I'm *rooting* for this or any other business that opens in downtown, and especially for one that's opening across the street from my lovely abode.
But rooting sometimes only goes so far. If someone downtown is opening something I can already *get* somewhere else -- a hair or nail salon, an Irish-themed bar, or a convenience store that sells what's already at CVS for a markup, I would still wish them the best, but in the end I'd really just be wishing.
So here's why I'm excited about Market Street Market -- the *big idea* they're putting forward is something a little bit different from anything else in the immediate vicinity. It's essentially a food-focused market -- bread, fruits, vegetables, meals-to-go, etc. that offers you the convenience of being right near Canal Place, the Roy Garage, Merrimack Street, Central Street, etc. In other words, it's a great spot to go in and grab something to nosh on or quickly prepare, but it's offering you *actual* food, unlike the convenience store on the other side of Market Street. Its shelves will be primarily filled with food and drink (and, I'm told, the chance to pick up a rare print copy of the New York Times)...but the fact that it'll be filled with enough stuff for me to stock my fridge and shelves separates it from, say, C'est. Sandwiches and coffee/tea bring a little bit of overlap with Olive That and Brew'd Awakening, but at the end of the day, I would stress the word overlap -- Market Street Market isn't trying to be a sandwich shop or a coffee bar. Besides, extra foot traffic in the area might be a boon for either of those places, anyway.
I can still remember the very first conversation I ever had in Lowell with the very first person I ever met in Lowell (Brandon Clark, two summers ago). Among the many topics that came up, and which ultimately helped inspire me to move here, one of the definite needs he expressed was that for some type of downtown grocery store (at the time, we were at Brew'd and he had some kind of a Let's-Get-Trader-Joe's-type of petition).
While we're still talking needs (and to square the circle from Monday's meeting, where the perennial 'how can we bring the college kids downtown?' question came up), I think downtown is still hurting for entertainment. Personally, I'd love to see a comedy club (and Kad Barma, thanks for mentioning the comedy at the Brew on Saturday night, I'm there with the family) but I'm sure there are other creative ways that the under-21 crowd could find a way to have fun.
As for Bad Dawgs, it's definitely sad to see the loss. I always appreciated their weekend hours, which I know have come in handy more than once after everything else was closed.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
Dunkin Dutton...All Day Long
I'm sure you've seen that the new Dunkin Donuts sitting right on the Pawtucket Canal (in the brick building) is now officially open for business. What you might not have known, however, (and what I didn't see until yesterday when I went there) is that it's 24/7 with a drive-through.
Awesome.
I know, somewhere some economist must be scratching his head wondering why Dunkin's penetration of the New England market has broken every axiom about franchise saturation.
At some point, it may seem like DD is just selling more snow to eskimos, but the fact that this one's got a 24/7 drive-through provides (in my eyes at least) unique value.
Currently, if you're starting your day at oh-dark-thirty either downtown or over by Mt. Vernon and Bowers, you're looking at 290 Central as your best bet for a quick caffeine injection and some quick chow before getting on the road. However, as wonderful as the convenience of 24/7 Dunkin is, that requires actually stopping and getting out of your car, not to mention moving out of your way and having to double back to the Connector.
Now, there's a way to get the food and the caffeinated goodness at any strange hour, without having to leave the car or be more than two quick right turns from the Highway. Plus, the new location might help spark some improvement in an area of town that could use a little bit of refurbishment.
I've gotta say I'm a fan.
Awesome.
I know, somewhere some economist must be scratching his head wondering why Dunkin's penetration of the New England market has broken every axiom about franchise saturation.
At some point, it may seem like DD is just selling more snow to eskimos, but the fact that this one's got a 24/7 drive-through provides (in my eyes at least) unique value.
Currently, if you're starting your day at oh-dark-thirty either downtown or over by Mt. Vernon and Bowers, you're looking at 290 Central as your best bet for a quick caffeine injection and some quick chow before getting on the road. However, as wonderful as the convenience of 24/7 Dunkin is, that requires actually stopping and getting out of your car, not to mention moving out of your way and having to double back to the Connector.
Now, there's a way to get the food and the caffeinated goodness at any strange hour, without having to leave the car or be more than two quick right turns from the Highway. Plus, the new location might help spark some improvement in an area of town that could use a little bit of refurbishment.
I've gotta say I'm a fan.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Happiness and the Joneses..
I know we've all heard many times about how "happiness" to many Americans -- and many others -- means keeping up with the proverbial Joneses -- the neighbors with the nicer lawn, the bigger garage, the finer-resolution television, etc.
This has actually been borne out in study after study. What makes people happy, materially at least, is not what they have in some absolute sense but what they have relative to those around them. So to quickly and glibly summarize a lot of that research, you'd be happier if I gave you $10,000 and nothing to your neighbors than you would if I gave you $20,000 but also gave that same sum to everyone on your block [As crazy as that sounds, poke around a bit and see how many times that type of thing has been replicated].
It makes no sense, I know, but as author Dan Ariely has pointed out time and again in a book (and blog) by this name, we're all Predictably Irrational.
It shouldn't be that strange, then, that I sometimes catch myself being, well, quite irrational about how I correlate my happiness and the length of my workday. To wit: What bothers me about spending 12-16 hour-days stacked end-on-end is not necessarily the fact in and of itself, but the fact that it happens while I'm surrounded by so many people with so very little on their plate.
See my point? If I were working on group projects that really meant weeks full of 16-hour days, it might not be so bad. In fact, given the right creative environment, it might even be a lot of fun -- just ask anyone who has put in the long pay (often for low wages) at a start-up, a publication, or any other creative enterprise. There's a sense of purpose and camaraderie you get when you're bouncing ideas off of other creative minds and *suffering* through something together.
But when you get the sense that you're constantly busting your tail amidst a sea (or a shore!) of people whose biggest daily conundrum is whether to get Chinese food or Subway at lunchtime, it can start to grate. Now, don't get me wrong -- I realize this is totally irrational, because my happiness shouldn't really be affected by what anyone else does (assuming it bears no direct impact on me). Whether everyone else in the building jumped into their cars at 3 p.m., 4 p.m. or 7 p.m. shouldn't *really* affect me one way or the other.
But, I must confess, sometimes it does. There are many aspects of my job that I like, and even some that I would say I love, but working on a somewhat disjointed staff that's partly manned by others' "extras" has its drawbacks -- much like anything else.
So what's the lesson to learn here? Whining about it on my blog might be somewhat therapeutic, but it doesn't really fix the problem.
I think the answer is that when you recognize things about yourself -- what makes you happy, what gets you down, etc. -- you need to find ways to control your environment in your favor when possible rather than trying to *fix* the way you feel. For me, that just means making sure I find the right job where I can work in a small team, fill some sort of niche, add value, and be recognized for it.
In other words, not too large, not too bureacratic, and not an easy spot for the lazy to "hide."
That sounds about right.
This has actually been borne out in study after study. What makes people happy, materially at least, is not what they have in some absolute sense but what they have relative to those around them. So to quickly and glibly summarize a lot of that research, you'd be happier if I gave you $10,000 and nothing to your neighbors than you would if I gave you $20,000 but also gave that same sum to everyone on your block [As crazy as that sounds, poke around a bit and see how many times that type of thing has been replicated].
It makes no sense, I know, but as author Dan Ariely has pointed out time and again in a book (and blog) by this name, we're all Predictably Irrational.
It shouldn't be that strange, then, that I sometimes catch myself being, well, quite irrational about how I correlate my happiness and the length of my workday. To wit: What bothers me about spending 12-16 hour-days stacked end-on-end is not necessarily the fact in and of itself, but the fact that it happens while I'm surrounded by so many people with so very little on their plate.
See my point? If I were working on group projects that really meant weeks full of 16-hour days, it might not be so bad. In fact, given the right creative environment, it might even be a lot of fun -- just ask anyone who has put in the long pay (often for low wages) at a start-up, a publication, or any other creative enterprise. There's a sense of purpose and camaraderie you get when you're bouncing ideas off of other creative minds and *suffering* through something together.
But when you get the sense that you're constantly busting your tail amidst a sea (or a shore!) of people whose biggest daily conundrum is whether to get Chinese food or Subway at lunchtime, it can start to grate. Now, don't get me wrong -- I realize this is totally irrational, because my happiness shouldn't really be affected by what anyone else does (assuming it bears no direct impact on me). Whether everyone else in the building jumped into their cars at 3 p.m., 4 p.m. or 7 p.m. shouldn't *really* affect me one way or the other.
But, I must confess, sometimes it does. There are many aspects of my job that I like, and even some that I would say I love, but working on a somewhat disjointed staff that's partly manned by others' "extras" has its drawbacks -- much like anything else.
So what's the lesson to learn here? Whining about it on my blog might be somewhat therapeutic, but it doesn't really fix the problem.
I think the answer is that when you recognize things about yourself -- what makes you happy, what gets you down, etc. -- you need to find ways to control your environment in your favor when possible rather than trying to *fix* the way you feel. For me, that just means making sure I find the right job where I can work in a small team, fill some sort of niche, add value, and be recognized for it.
In other words, not too large, not too bureacratic, and not an easy spot for the lazy to "hide."
That sounds about right.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Don't Ask, Don't Tell? Don't Care...
Today America swore in its 44th Commander-in-Chief (actually, its 43rd, which you might've annoyingly pointed out to someone today if you paid attention in History class when they covered those late-19th century Presidents that all seemed to wind up in relative obscurity).
But anyway, it's hard to say what this change will mean for the proverbial boots on the ground. In the short term, though, that answer is clear -- nothing. As for long-term commitments in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Horn of Africa, and the Balkans, however, that all remains to be seen.
One major military policy change that's likely to come about during this Presidency, however, is the repeal of the 15 year-old "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy implemented soon after President Clinton took office.
When this happens (and I say when, not if, based on statements that have come directly from high-level Obama staffers), you will hear lots of vocal, strident cries from small groups of die-hards who will threaten not to re-enlist, or to resign their commissions, or to working towards Obama's defeat in 2012, or whatever other thing they'll vow to do in their moment of righteous anger.
Well, if you're curious, here's the reaction of one servicemember with another couple decades, a few promotions, and several deployments left in the tank -- I really don't care whether someone who wants to serve is straight, gay, or lesbian.
First of all, anyone who doesn't already know that there are plenty of homosexual service members already in uniform either isn't in the military or isn't paying attention. Based on my experience so far -- at OCS, advanced training, at Little Creek, in Groton, and a few times the world over in between, for the most part, no one really seems too hung up about it (that's only my first-hand observation, though...I know the many who've been dishonorably discharged might feel very differently).
Second of all, assuming other already-established codes within the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) are respected, the presence of homosexuals in the ranks doesn't really *threaten* good order and discipline any more than the threat of heterosexuality already does. Trust me, I could tell you enough love triangle stories about deployments (both observed and heard second-hand) to bore you. So I won't.
When I think personally about the challenges I'm going to face in the next few years, I will admit that sometimes I worry about things:
I worry about how I'm going to perform in Land Navigation (let's just say I came in dead last during the last major land nav evolution I did, and wouldn't have even made it that far if the bus hadn't swung around to the other side of Fort Story).
I worry about swimming (I was once so far behind on an open-ocean swim that after just deciding to say 'screw it' and run in the hard sand I still finished behind a few of the swim-only folks).
I worry about tons of other things. I worry about tactical performance, I worry about lingo (how many times can you call the 'latrine' the 'head' and get away with it?), I worry about regulations, leadership styles, and which shoulder to wear which patch on the ACUs. I worry about whether I'll be able to keep my feet and legs together after hurtling toward the ground from a perfectly good C-130.
And that's not even deployment.
Overseas, a host of other concerns might pop up -- urban rioting, what pieces of trash and dead animals in the road might conceal, and about whether standing in one spot for too long might allow someone to draw a bead. That's on top of trying to get the Dari verb endings straight and remembering not to expose the soles of my boots when sitting in a meeting with my legs crossed.
And all of those worries come without even mentioning the worries about the people who really matter, including one person in particular who might be spending a lot of time, well, worrying.
Nowhere on that list of worries is a concern about whether anyone in my platoon, company, battalion, or brigade might be gay or lesbian.
That just doesn't factor in there for me.
I just don't care. To me, whether you're gay or straight says about as much for your job performance as whether you're rooting for the Cardinals or the Steelers in the Super Bowl -- in other words, nothing.
When the ban finally does get lifted, I might take a second to stop and recognize how a historical wrong has been corrected, and how difficult things must have been for those who've been dishonorably discharged for an identity that I don't believe they chose.
But then it's back to work. There's too much else on my plate.
But anyway, it's hard to say what this change will mean for the proverbial boots on the ground. In the short term, though, that answer is clear -- nothing. As for long-term commitments in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Horn of Africa, and the Balkans, however, that all remains to be seen.
One major military policy change that's likely to come about during this Presidency, however, is the repeal of the 15 year-old "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy implemented soon after President Clinton took office.
When this happens (and I say when, not if, based on statements that have come directly from high-level Obama staffers), you will hear lots of vocal, strident cries from small groups of die-hards who will threaten not to re-enlist, or to resign their commissions, or to working towards Obama's defeat in 2012, or whatever other thing they'll vow to do in their moment of righteous anger.
Well, if you're curious, here's the reaction of one servicemember with another couple decades, a few promotions, and several deployments left in the tank -- I really don't care whether someone who wants to serve is straight, gay, or lesbian.
First of all, anyone who doesn't already know that there are plenty of homosexual service members already in uniform either isn't in the military or isn't paying attention. Based on my experience so far -- at OCS, advanced training, at Little Creek, in Groton, and a few times the world over in between, for the most part, no one really seems too hung up about it (that's only my first-hand observation, though...I know the many who've been dishonorably discharged might feel very differently).
Second of all, assuming other already-established codes within the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) are respected, the presence of homosexuals in the ranks doesn't really *threaten* good order and discipline any more than the threat of heterosexuality already does. Trust me, I could tell you enough love triangle stories about deployments (both observed and heard second-hand) to bore you. So I won't.
When I think personally about the challenges I'm going to face in the next few years, I will admit that sometimes I worry about things:
I worry about how I'm going to perform in Land Navigation (let's just say I came in dead last during the last major land nav evolution I did, and wouldn't have even made it that far if the bus hadn't swung around to the other side of Fort Story).
I worry about swimming (I was once so far behind on an open-ocean swim that after just deciding to say 'screw it' and run in the hard sand I still finished behind a few of the swim-only folks).
I worry about tons of other things. I worry about tactical performance, I worry about lingo (how many times can you call the 'latrine' the 'head' and get away with it?), I worry about regulations, leadership styles, and which shoulder to wear which patch on the ACUs. I worry about whether I'll be able to keep my feet and legs together after hurtling toward the ground from a perfectly good C-130.
And that's not even deployment.
Overseas, a host of other concerns might pop up -- urban rioting, what pieces of trash and dead animals in the road might conceal, and about whether standing in one spot for too long might allow someone to draw a bead. That's on top of trying to get the Dari verb endings straight and remembering not to expose the soles of my boots when sitting in a meeting with my legs crossed.
And all of those worries come without even mentioning the worries about the people who really matter, including one person in particular who might be spending a lot of time, well, worrying.
Nowhere on that list of worries is a concern about whether anyone in my platoon, company, battalion, or brigade might be gay or lesbian.
That just doesn't factor in there for me.
I just don't care. To me, whether you're gay or straight says about as much for your job performance as whether you're rooting for the Cardinals or the Steelers in the Super Bowl -- in other words, nothing.
When the ban finally does get lifted, I might take a second to stop and recognize how a historical wrong has been corrected, and how difficult things must have been for those who've been dishonorably discharged for an identity that I don't believe they chose.
But then it's back to work. There's too much else on my plate.
Dispatch from Ramadi, Part I
A friend of mine is currently deployed in Ramadi, Iraq with 6th Marines. This is his second one-year tour with the regiment, with one "dwell time" year sandwiched in the middle. Just prior to his first one-year tour with the regiment, he did a seventh-month stint as an embedded advisor in an Iraqi Army unit in Ramadi (prior to the tribal awakening). In other words, this guy will have spent more than twice as much time from 2006-09 in Iraq than he will have spent in the U.S.
As I receive updates that start to answer the burning question of "What's really going on over there?" I will post them here. Of course, there isn't any one answer to that question -- no big picture, just lots and lots of little ones that would change greatly based on who you talked to, and where they were.
One thing to mention before you jump in -- Al Fajr is Arabic for "The Dawn" and it refers to the combat operations that took place in Fallujah in November 2004.
Kinetic activity in Al Anbar has slowed down quiet a bit from even the end of 2007. The biggest threat to us right now are bored Marines that are getting creatively stupid. The Marines coming in that thought we were going right back into Al Fajr are disappointed they missed out on the 'fun,' and the guys coming back for their 3rd or 4th are looking forward to hitting the gym or just earning that combat pay.
The elections are big news, and despite the Obamafest all over the cable news, it seems like the Iraqis don't really care about it. The Iraqis have their own election to worry about, and they are looking forward to getting on with their lives. There is a spirited debate regarding the candidates. Despite being a very young and inexperienced democracy, the Iraqis seem to be embracing the ideals whole heartedly. The old maxim was that in Iraq, politics = violence, but you don't see a lot of that these days. There are more campaign posters on the walls than bullet holes, and those bullet holes are being patched as well. Surprisingly, there has been little defacing of political posters despite the strong opinions about some of the candidates, even Aifan's posters.
I like the campaign posters around here. They look better than the ones we see stateside because they are simplistic, and sometimes fit right into our preconceived notions. Take for example, the poster for Aifan Sadun Aifan. Aifan was one of our first and best allies in the Falluljah region. He tries to live up to his image as a warrior by going everywhere wearing his kneepads and combat boots, even when he's wearing a suit. On his campaign poster, I swear I saw him wearing ESS ballistic eyewear, and a better pair than what I was issued. It was only a picture from the chest up, but I'm sure he had his kneepads and combat boots on at that time. Did I mention he has better hair than John Edwards? Greased back like the cool kids at school, not layered and feathered like a televangelists'.
I must sign off for now. I still have a few things to review before my shift ends, and I'm enjoying the election commentary.
Captain Scott Wise
As I receive updates that start to answer the burning question of "What's really going on over there?" I will post them here. Of course, there isn't any one answer to that question -- no big picture, just lots and lots of little ones that would change greatly based on who you talked to, and where they were.
One thing to mention before you jump in -- Al Fajr is Arabic for "The Dawn" and it refers to the combat operations that took place in Fallujah in November 2004.
Kinetic activity in Al Anbar has slowed down quiet a bit from even the end of 2007. The biggest threat to us right now are bored Marines that are getting creatively stupid. The Marines coming in that thought we were going right back into Al Fajr are disappointed they missed out on the 'fun,' and the guys coming back for their 3rd or 4th are looking forward to hitting the gym or just earning that combat pay.
The elections are big news, and despite the Obamafest all over the cable news, it seems like the Iraqis don't really care about it. The Iraqis have their own election to worry about, and they are looking forward to getting on with their lives. There is a spirited debate regarding the candidates. Despite being a very young and inexperienced democracy, the Iraqis seem to be embracing the ideals whole heartedly. The old maxim was that in Iraq, politics = violence, but you don't see a lot of that these days. There are more campaign posters on the walls than bullet holes, and those bullet holes are being patched as well. Surprisingly, there has been little defacing of political posters despite the strong opinions about some of the candidates, even Aifan's posters.
I like the campaign posters around here. They look better than the ones we see stateside because they are simplistic, and sometimes fit right into our preconceived notions. Take for example, the poster for Aifan Sadun Aifan. Aifan was one of our first and best allies in the Falluljah region. He tries to live up to his image as a warrior by going everywhere wearing his kneepads and combat boots, even when he's wearing a suit. On his campaign poster, I swear I saw him wearing ESS ballistic eyewear, and a better pair than what I was issued. It was only a picture from the chest up, but I'm sure he had his kneepads and combat boots on at that time. Did I mention he has better hair than John Edwards? Greased back like the cool kids at school, not layered and feathered like a televangelists'.
I must sign off for now. I still have a few things to review before my shift ends, and I'm enjoying the election commentary.
Captain Scott Wise
Monday, January 19, 2009
A Neat Obama *Artifact*
Here's a story the Boston Globe ran back in 1990 about Barack Obama, a 2L who had just been elected President of the Harvard Law Review: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/1990/02/15/a_law_review_breakthrough/
There's no biographical or other information in here that you're probably not already familiar with if you've been following the campaign, but it's neat to be able to get a snapshot like this of someone who already seemed destined to do big things from a relatively young age.
Items like this are a reminder of how the Internet creates a running historical log of events that anyone can quickly access -- it's easy to forget, but even within the lifetime of anyone reading this, there was certainly a time where a *reprint* like this would've had to be picked up in a hard-copy daily edition of a newspaper, which anyone could have reasonably missed had they been otherwise tied-up that day.
That is, unless they knew what they were looking for, and felt like searching via microfiche at the local library.
I guess the next step in the evolution here is that when those who came of age entirely in the Facebook/MySpace era become the Masters of the Universe. Just think, someday viewers all the world over will be able to see images of the Secretary of State stumbling to victory in the Beer Pong championships at his alma mater, no doubt captured for posterity. Or maybe a Fortune 500 CEO holding a Senator's head over the toilet in their Eating Club's bathroom.
My prediction for when that happens? We'll just redefine normalcy and we won't bat an eye when we see people's coming-of-age years captured on photo or video (within a flexible standard of 'reasonableness,' that is).
There's no biographical or other information in here that you're probably not already familiar with if you've been following the campaign, but it's neat to be able to get a snapshot like this of someone who already seemed destined to do big things from a relatively young age.
Items like this are a reminder of how the Internet creates a running historical log of events that anyone can quickly access -- it's easy to forget, but even within the lifetime of anyone reading this, there was certainly a time where a *reprint* like this would've had to be picked up in a hard-copy daily edition of a newspaper, which anyone could have reasonably missed had they been otherwise tied-up that day.
That is, unless they knew what they were looking for, and felt like searching via microfiche at the local library.
I guess the next step in the evolution here is that when those who came of age entirely in the Facebook/MySpace era become the Masters of the Universe. Just think, someday viewers all the world over will be able to see images of the Secretary of State stumbling to victory in the Beer Pong championships at his alma mater, no doubt captured for posterity. Or maybe a Fortune 500 CEO holding a Senator's head over the toilet in their Eating Club's bathroom.
My prediction for when that happens? We'll just redefine normalcy and we won't bat an eye when we see people's coming-of-age years captured on photo or video (within a flexible standard of 'reasonableness,' that is).
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Bernie Lynch on Comms
I just got back from four hours in the car following the funeral / wake in Paramus / Ridgewood, NJ...right away, I threw my feet up on the coffee table, sprawled out on the coach, and starting flipping channels.
Stopping for a moment at Channel 10, there was Bernie Lynch reminding the Lowell City Council that "communication works in both directions."
I loved it. I loved it because one of the most frustrating little things that happened all the time during my travels overseas came when brother Marine/Army units would complain (about us) that, "Those f---ing guys never tell us anything."
That never ceased to amaze me. And every single time it happened, I had the same answer back -- to them, to my own guys, and to anyone else who would listen: "Comms are a two-way street."
In response to the original statement, I always wondered:
Would that be a reference to the S2/S3 powwow every night where all the players on base met and laid out everything going on in solid detail?
Would that be a reference to the fact that representatives from those units were in our Tactical Operations Center (TOC) on a daily and nightly basis to talk shop?
Was that said in light of the fact that the Regiment owned all the battlespace in the Area of Operations (AO) and had to approve every single outside-the-wire maneuver?
But best of all, would the speaker be referring to the ZERO times he had attempted to phone or e-mail over and just...ask?
That's why I loved it when Mr. Lynch made his point, and when Councilor Broderick even threw the "two-way street" phrase itself into the discussion.
I'm sure Councilors Lenzi and Kazanjian had reasons to be frustrated. I'm obviously not privy to their phone and e-mail communications, so I have no idea how often they do or don't reach out to Mr. Lynch on the arena or other major issues.
But without getting into the weeds on specifics, you have to love his point as a general piece of wisdom -- the next time you feel frustrated because someone didn't tell you something, stop for a second and make sure that you made the effort to ask.
Stopping for a moment at Channel 10, there was Bernie Lynch reminding the Lowell City Council that "communication works in both directions."
I loved it. I loved it because one of the most frustrating little things that happened all the time during my travels overseas came when brother Marine/Army units would complain (about us) that, "Those f---ing guys never tell us anything."
That never ceased to amaze me. And every single time it happened, I had the same answer back -- to them, to my own guys, and to anyone else who would listen: "Comms are a two-way street."
In response to the original statement, I always wondered:
Would that be a reference to the S2/S3 powwow every night where all the players on base met and laid out everything going on in solid detail?
Would that be a reference to the fact that representatives from those units were in our Tactical Operations Center (TOC) on a daily and nightly basis to talk shop?
Was that said in light of the fact that the Regiment owned all the battlespace in the Area of Operations (AO) and had to approve every single outside-the-wire maneuver?
But best of all, would the speaker be referring to the ZERO times he had attempted to phone or e-mail over and just...ask?
That's why I loved it when Mr. Lynch made his point, and when Councilor Broderick even threw the "two-way street" phrase itself into the discussion.
I'm sure Councilors Lenzi and Kazanjian had reasons to be frustrated. I'm obviously not privy to their phone and e-mail communications, so I have no idea how often they do or don't reach out to Mr. Lynch on the arena or other major issues.
But without getting into the weeds on specifics, you have to love his point as a general piece of wisdom -- the next time you feel frustrated because someone didn't tell you something, stop for a second and make sure that you made the effort to ask.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)