Gillian found this in an old stack of papers the other day. I thought I'd pass it along (read carefully):
Dear sir or madame or some sort of she-male women in suit;
Is your site crap? If you answer yes, Olga will help. If you answer no, you lie. Olga has seen your site. Is crap. Several problems with site. First of all, is written in one language. This is crap! Olga knows that best way to reach more clients is to write in many languages. For example, if site was also available in Chechnoslovenian language, 16 more people would be able to read and purchase items from site (was 17 more people, until Stinky Ivan drank too much vodka and tried to mate his bull with wild boar. God rest his soul). Imagine business from 16 more people! Is good, yes?
No. Is crap. Is crap because no one wants to buy product from your crappy site. This is your other big problem. Olga will fix. Site should sell many things, so people will not need to travel on "Superhighway" to other sites to find things they need. Olga has never seen superhighway, but traffic sounds worse than Ugstavich Street when Pachinka, one legged whore offered Yaking Day Special! Your site must offer all that Pachinka did and more. For example, what if customer think, "Ah, I wish to purchase refreshing beverage, warm sweater, and find romantic love all at one place! But where?" Olga has answer. Your site could be solution to customers problems. What to do? Sell mule online! Mule produce milk (refreshing beverage!), has thick coat (warm sweater!) and is mule (romantic love!). is answer to all problems.
olga has checked. your site only provides computer interface software to improve broadband operations (or handmade chocolates in shape of favorite civil war heros or some other crap). who the hell wants to cuddle with that?
Olga also did research. found domain name www.mule.com is still available. if you do not jump on this offer like the late Stinky Ivan jumped on Pachinka, one-legged whore, you are ignorant filth and i spit on your ancestors' graves. If you think that Olga's advice is good, then you pay Olga $67 krinkstoys (krinkstoy is currency of Chechnoslovenia. 1 krinkstoy = 4 liters of kerosene and one turnip). Please consider offer.
Thank you for your time which would otherwise be wasted if not spent on Olga, who will help bring sales to your company, Olga Nevishnikovstoyolavich
Obviously, it hasn't been edited for political correctness but, neither has it undergone the creative stifling that is typical of modern sales literature. In all honesty, I don't think I could say no to an email like this, even if it was spam.
I'll check with the original author to see if they'd like to take credit.
Wow. Um. Wow.
Okay, first off, that's a really long diatribe, and let me tell you, after speaking to Olga, I found she was rather upset. But perhaps I should let her speak for herself:
You stupid. Is clear to Olga. First, you say too much, and Olga finds that when people speak much, they say little. This why you stupid. You also stupid because you clearly miss point. Olga is trying to HELP. Olga is not just thinking outside box. For Olga, there is no box. Only mule. What, you say? Olga is attacking person, not idea? That is because person is stupid for having idea. If idea had person, then idea would be stupid. Also, Olga would like to point out the inherent contradiction evident in trying to use normative school of thought to critique others, while still remaining entrenched in the dominant paradigm. Normative critique is subject to pratfalls of normativity. Duh.
Really, I find it best not to cross her in issues like this.
Kitty, LOL!
Here's my response -- randomly generated, of course -- about Kitty, and fortunately it is shorter so that chris b and I will actually read it all (yes, even I didn't read all the words I used to harangue Olga):
I am writing to express my concerns about Kitty and, more specifically, her ultimata regarding the worst classes of ghastly fugitives there are. Before I launch into my main topic, I want to make a few matters crystal-clear: (1) Kitty spews nothing but lame retorts and innuendoes, and (2) as a result of that, according to Kitty's logic, it would be beneficial for wily converts to onanism to make nearby communities victims of environmental degradation and toxic waste dumping. Now that you know where I stand on those issues, I can safely say that you don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: Kitty ignores a breathtaking number of facts, most notably:
Fact: Kitty's real enmity against us comes through in her philippics, which she uses to break the mind and spirit, castrate the character, and kill the career of anyone whose ideas she deems to be offensive.
Fact: Evil prevails when good people do nothing.
Fact: Not everyone agrees with her.
In addition, I am deliberately using colorful language in this letter. I am deliberately using provocative phrases that I hope will stick in the minds of my readers. I do ensure, however, that my words are always appropriate and accurate and clearly explain how Kitty argues that I am pompous for wanting to create and nurture a true spirit of community. I should point out that this is almost the same argument that was made against Copernicus and Galileo almost half a millennium ago. If Kitty were to deplete the ozone layer, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that if Kitty would abandon her name-calling and false dichotomies it would be much easier for me to provide an antidote to contemporary manifestations of mean-spirited, nasty antidisestablishmentarianism. She has a glib proficiency with words and very sensitive nostrils. Kitty can smell money in your pocket from a block away. Once that delicious aroma reaches her nostrils, she'll start talking about the joy of sectarianism and how her theatrics enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. As you listen to Kitty's sing-song, chances are you won't even notice her hand as it goes into your pocket. Only later, after you realize you've been robbed, will you truly understand that if anything will free us from the shackles of her pestiferous nostrums, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that we are indeed living in infantile times. That said, let me continue. The bottom line is that sometimes, what you don't know can hurt you.
"The Olga Letter" holds a special place in my marketer's heart. In 20+ years of experience in success in the field of b2b marketing, I have never read a letter so superbly crafted and expertly engineered.
Heidigger said, "True art is that to which not one stroke can be added, nor one stroke removed, without changing the nature of the whole." This letter qualifies.
If I taught a class in direct mail marketing (email or otherwise), I would use this letter as THE example of the finest marketing letter ever written.
Allow me to elucidate:
The letter opens with an attention-grabbing headline/question. Usually, one hopes to open a sales pitch with one or the other. This brilliant author manages to do both and thereby doubles the impact on the reader. One cannot help but read on.
Immediately moving to reveal the purpose of her communication, Olga makes her initial pitch in the second sentence and calms the fears of the reader who knows their site is deep e-doo but has no idea how to improve their lot. Instant gratification – the “I can help you” arrives well within the first 6 seconds of commanding the attention of the reader. Most telephone operators can’t get that task accomplished in the first minute of any conversation, even when their boss spends thousands of dollars to train them to do so! Another stroke of genius and we are only two sentences into this gem of creative writing.
Next, the author goes for the jugular and pulls in ALL her readers. “If you answer no,, you lie.” How simple and direct can one be? Short sentences. Staccato prose. The reader is shocked into paying attention. “How dare she?” The reader asks – and reads on, which is exactly what the author wishes them to do.
Supporting documentation follows instantly, letting the reader know they are dealing with no flippant prattler here. This person has done her research. She has actually seen the reader’s website! Oh dear! No hiding from truth now. The reader is forced to read on to learn exactly what is wrong with their website. Profits hang in the balance – the reader is hooked.
Documenting the problems, “Several problems with site. First of all, is written in one language”, our intrepid author rolls up her sleeves and shares her considerable knowledge in the field and talents freely with her dear readers. Ah – a gift; something for nothing. Always an excellent communication process; now the reader is debt to the author, making them more likely to ‘sign up’ at the end.
Olga is not shy about her qualifications and puts them right in this first, tightly crafted paragraph. “Olga knows the best way to reach more clients….” What entrepreneur isn’t hanging on her every word now? They NEED to know how to reach more clients – and Olga knows how!
Moving instantly to supporting examples, the author cements her case with concrete data – precise numbers to prove her point. Ah, and now, the stroke of genius… “(was 17 people, until Stinky Ivan drank too much vodka and tried to mate his bull with wild boar. God rest his soul.) By adding the personal interest note to explain the origin of the numbers, Olga again accomplishes two objectives with a single stroke. She has solidified in her readers’ minds the verity of her calculations. And, she has provided a personal backdrop, increasing her readers’ likelihood of remembering both Olga and her argument. Of course, Olga is so memorable, how could anyone forget?
I could go on. I could conduct an advanced writing seminar around this. But I will spare you. I understand that not everyone is so deeply moved by such exhibitions of brilliance. I expect you have to have spent a lifetime in marketing to be so moved.
So here’s to you, Olga! I am your undying fan.
Wow. This is both disturbingly brilliant and precise insanity, rolled into a sort of marketing-esque roulade of ... God only knows what. I'm stunned.
I think I love her ... :P
This is Ridiculous and Genius. I don't care where it came from, I'm interested in what they can do. It's just silly. Love it. Love the insults. Love the dead bull mating drunk.
It is my goal to one day write a sales letter this amusing/offensive.
Ryan
This is genious if however a little rude.
This letter is crap
We hired Olga and went from being the largest widget retailer in the US to the 8th largest online turnip vendor in Virginia. Thanks Olga...
This is my complaint about Ms. Nevishnikovstoyolavich (generated by Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator):
Some of my colleagues recommended that I write a letter about how primitive, evil vigilantes like Ms. Olga Nevishnikovstoyolavich are all alike. This is that letter. Unless you share my view that Olga is sympathetic to careless causes of all stripes, there's no need for you to hear me further. Nonetheless, my cause is to put an end to disloyal unilateralism. I call upon men and women from all walks of life to support my cause with their life-affirming eloquence and indomitable spirit of human decency and moral righteousness. Only then will the whole world realize that Olga doesn't want us to think outside the box. She would rather we settle for the meatless bone of autism.
If you read Olga's writings while mentally out of focus, you may get the sense that Olga can convince criminals to fill out an application form before committing a crime. But if you read her writings while mentally in focus and weigh each point carefully, it's clear that when I hear her say that merit is adequately measured by her methods and qualifications, I have to wonder about her. Is she thoroughly untoward? Is she simply being piteous? Or is she merely embracing a delusion in which she must believe in order to continue believing in herself? The answer should be self-evident, so let me just point out that Olga has been deluding people into believing that she can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. Don't let her delude you, too. Olga once tried to palm off our present situation as the compelling ground for worldwide boosterism. If you consider this an exception to the rule then you really don't understand how Olga operates. I hope, however, that you at least understand that she has been willing to sup with the devil every time she felt she could profit personally from it. It is no more complicated than that. She is a proponent of "propagandism" -- a term Olga uses catachrestically in place of "masochism". But it goes further than that; it has been said that this whole discussion has turned into a war of words between a few people. I believe that to be true. I also believe that she should stop caterwauling about what she doesn't understand. Let me recap that for you, because it really is extraordinarily important: She is always prating about how the most refractory nutcases I've ever seen have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us. (She used to say that we should be grateful for the precious freedom to be robbed and kicked in the face by such a noble creature as her, but the evidence is too contrary, so she's given up on that score.)
Olga ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person. She is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, she has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people she desires to lead.
I am being utterly serious when I say that Olga wants me to stop trying to call your attention to the problem of longiloquent freaks. Instead, she'd rather I recant all of the claims I've made in this letter. Sorry, but I don't accept defeat that easily. That which is built inextricably into the laws of the universe cannot be entirely pea-brained. She and her irritable, gloomy apparatchiks must laugh about this in private, knowing that if anything will free us from the shackles of her distasteful scare tactics, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that every time Olga utters or writes a statement that supports barbarism -- even indirectly -- it sends a message that there is an international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids. I indeed suspect we mustn't let her make such statements, partly because I am appalled that I have cause to write this article, but primarily because we should not concern ourselves with her putative virtue or vice. Rather, we should concern ourselves with our own welfare and with the fact that if I had my druthers, Olga would never have had the opportunity to con us into believing that she is a perpetual victim of injustice. As it stands, Olga's slogans are like an enormous nepotism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must express our concerns about Olga's sophomoric, mutinous nostrums, because Olga's methods are much subtler now than ever before. Olga is more adept at hidden mind control and her techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized.
In point of fact, if Olga's foot soldiers had even an ounce of integrity, they would advance a clear, credible, and effective vision for dealing with our present dilemma and its most temperamental manifestations. It's possible that Olga doesn't realize this because she has been ingrained with so much of stoicism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we shed the light of truth on the evil that is Olga. I used a phrase a few moments ago. I referred to her toadies as "noisome, passive-aggressive trollops." You ought to memorize that phrase, because, frankly, I decidedly don't believe that she can dismantle the family unit and get away with it. So when Olga says that that's what I believe, I see how little she understands my position.
Contrary to the impression that unpatriotic, sordid degenerates offer "new," "innovative," and "advanced" ideas, there is little new in their smears. What is Olga's current objective? As usual, there are multiple objectives:
* to cashier anyone who tries to say "no" to Olga's incoherent conjectures, * to provide cover for a disdainful agenda, and * to fuel the censorship-and-intolerance crowd.
In retrospect, Olga has always been more complacent than most aberrent, appalling phonies. Her pledge not to demand special treatment that, in many cases, borders on the ridiculous is merely empty rhetoric, invoked on occasion for theatrical effect but otherwise studiously ignored. I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that we must learn to celebrate our diversity, not because it is the politically correct thing to do, but because if she wants to be taken seriously, she should counter the arguments in this letter with facts, not illogical panaceas, personal anecdotes, or insults.
Olga has been trying to convince us that obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, and ambiguity are marks of depth and brilliance. This pathetic attempt to up the ante considerably deserves no comment other than to say that if you looked up "jejune" in the dictionary, you'd probably see Olga's picture. While perhaps offensive to some readers, only a direct quote can fully convey the mendacious nature and content of her offhand remarks: "Attention, serfs! Your orders are to substitute rumor and gossip for bona fide evidence, and to do so at any cost." I have never been in favor of being gratuitously muzzy-headed. I have also never been in favor of sticking my head in the sand or of refusing to summon up the courage to disabuse Olga of the notion that people are pawns to be used and manipulated.
Yet there's more to it than that. Disrespectful doomsday prophets often take earthworms or similar small animals and impale them on a pin to enjoy watching them twist and writhe as they slowly die. Similarly, Olga enjoys watching respectable people twist and writhe whenever she threatens to put obstreperous thoughts in our children's minds. If she continues to extinguish the voices of opposition, the result can be a tone-deafness, a cluelessness, on matters that are at the center of experience for vast segments of the population. She wishes she could buy "ethnic cleanser" at the grocery store, and every intellectually honest person knows it.
It's not easy for me to say this, but in the good old days, when courage, honor, devotion, duty, and loyalty meant something, it was comparatively easy to admonish Olga not seven times, but seventy times seven. There, I said it. Now I can continue with my previous point, which is that Olga's hariolations are not an abstract problem. They have very concrete, immediate, and unpleasant consequences. For instance, Olga attracts sinful power brokers to her claque by telling them that she does the things she does "for the children". I suppose the people to whom she tells such things just want to believe lies that make them feel intellectually and spiritually superior to others. Whether or not that's the case, I once managed to get Olga to agree that materialism is not confined to any specific era, culture, or country. Unfortunately, a few minutes later, she did a volte-face and denied that she had ever said that.
I do not wish to evaluate narcissism here, though I feel that if you read between the lines of Olga's projects, you'll indisputably find that the tone of Olga's effusions is eerily reminiscent of that of ultra-ignorant pseudo-intellectuals of the late 1940s, in the sense that my general thesis is that Olga had previously claimed that she had no intention to perpetrate acts of the most jackbooted character. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what she did. Next, she denied that she would have a serious destabilizing effect on our institutions. We all know what happened then. Now, Olga would have us believe she'd never ever address what is, in the end, a nonexistent problem. Will she? Go figure. My view is that Olga is reluctant to justify her snarky generalizations to us "common people" because we "just wouldn't understand". But there's the rub; I certainly feel that Olga has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. She obviously has none, or she wouldn't damn this nation and this world to Hell. I'll talk a lot more about that later, but first let me finish my general thesis: I challenge her to point out any text in this letter that proposes that she is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. It isn't there. There's neither a hint nor a suggestion of such a thing. If Olga got her way, she'd be able to pursue a twofold credo of faddism and cannibalism. Brrrr! It sends chills down my spine just thinking about that. And there you have it. The blatant ignorance and social maladjustment of Ms. Olga Nevishnikovstoyolavich's theatrics will enthrone falsehood in the very center of human thought by the end of the decade.
haha hillarious but i have to admit i gave up on steve's reply about a third of the way through 2nd paragraph...maybe I'll read it later.
Olga knows shoes...
that is great, it looks like Kawasaki used Olgas help and bought www.mule.com just from her(?) advice!..
[Copys pastes - changes olga for adickt - send spam - waits for the work to come flooding in]
"We have Mountain Dew or crab juice."
"Ewwwwwwww...I'll take the crab juice."