On Saturday 26 May 2007, Dawn _ wrote:
> I love being open to other possibilities, but when those
> possibilities are less than .00001%, then they're insignificant and
> irrelevent. <<What's irrelevant to one person might be "hope" to
> another. And, where does the .00001% come from? Did you do the math
> on that, or did you just start punching in "0's" to prove a point?
> I, for one, am glad that Orville & Wilbur didn't give up when myriads
> of people told them that "flying is impossible."
Actually, I should have said that, considering the other influences, the
chances were next to none. As was pointed out elsewhere, even if she
does have a personality disorder, then the MLMs have certainly
accentuated it. The programming she's getting is likely overshadowed
large parts of her own personality. I was essentially being a bit
sarcastic and a bit facetious, but the point is that the chances are
VERY slim it's just a PD at this point.
>
> True, but she related them in context. That makes a difference.
> <<I will agree that this statement is partially true. However, it
> rules out the possibility for "possibilities"
> & white. There is a lot of "gray" out there. >>
Yes, there is gray, but even if it is not the MLMs and is a PD,
considering the symptoms, what difference, in practicality, does that
make? Will it mean this woman is likely to get treatment? It probably
means she is *less* likely to get treatment if it's a PD. In other
words, what the cause is will, in practice, make no difference.
> There's no need to defend MLMs.
So I said before and I'll say again. You seem quite eager to defend
MLMs. Put together with your other statements, even though you've had
troubles, it seems you're bound and determined to tell everyone in this
group, "Hey, MLMs are good." Okay, maybe, "Hey, SOME MLMs are good."
Read the ground rules. That won't wash here.
I've worked with people that won't face problems, I've worked with
people in recovery, I've worked with people who have been out of
recovery for years. There are appropriate places for all. This is a
place where the ground rules are pretty much stated from the start: We
don't support MLMs. That is 100% appropriate for a survivor's group.
You're fighting an uphill battle and you're trying to reach out with an
inappropriate message for this forum. This is NOT the place to stick
up for any MLM.
> No.
>
> On the other hand, please, keep defending them. I don't think you see
> in yourself what you are showing to the group and, honestly, the more
> you defend MLMs and the more you point out other possibilities, the
> more the limits on your thinking and on your restricted point of view
> show. It's good people interested in MLMs see those limits. I'm not
> saying this to be mean or cruel, but because the more I read your
> posts, the more I see a limited viewpoint with blinders that you are
> probably not aware of.
>
> <<Hal, I have been in direct sales (MLM's) for 16 years. As stated
> before, I've been a part of several MLM's, and all but one cost me a
> lot of money and a lot of other issues. I have seen BOTH sides. You,
> my friend, on the other hand, are going on what you have heard and
> have seen about other companies. I have lived it for 16 years,
> first-hand.
Why so long? You saw a number not work time and time again, yet for 16
years you kept going on what had been proven to you to be a poor
business model.
No, I was not seduced by the dark side of their farce, other than for a
few weeks or so when I was in college. That does not make me ignorant
of them. In some ways that might even provide me a more dispassionate
view of the situation.
I spent about a decade working in treatment situations. I never was an
alcoholic, but I learned what is involved and what happens to
alcoholics. I never was addicted to PCP, but I learned how to handle
the situations and what was going on with an addict. Not having been
in an MLM for 16 years does not disqualify from knowing what was going
on. Some people don't need 16 years to see another side. I've worked
with people in abusive relationships, then found myself to be in an
emotionally abusive relationship at one point. I got out in a few
months. Yes, it offered me a different point of view, but on the other
hand, there was nothing that went on within that relationship and
within my experience that had not been documented thousands of times
and which I had not learned about previously.
> I have also stated MANY TIMES that just because I am
> currently part of an MLM doesn't mean that I think ALL of them are
> viable sources of income. Quite the contrary. Ihave stated many times
> that most MLM's are scams and are not viable sources of income. So,
> there are no blinders here.
Yes, you have stated that many times, but that does not mean you don't
have blinders on. The point is that when we, as humans, are not seeing
something, we are not aware of it. That is my point. You often use
the reasoning MLMs use and eschew logic for emotional arguments. My
point is that this makes me strongly suspect that, as much as you're
sure your MLM is "good", that it still uses some techniques to keep
people from reasoning through what is actually happening.
> I know what I have experienced first
> hand, and I know all too well the possibilities for failure. If
> there are blinders being worn, they are by you, who will very quickly
> point out that "there are NO 'good' MLM's." To me, THAT'S the
> one-sided view." ...
And see my point earlier about what is appropriate for this forum. I
have also been one to say, and later been corrected by those with
experience, that some MLMs sound harmless. This isn't a game
of, "You're wrong," then, "No, you're wrong." If that's all you can do
is throw a statement back at me with weak proof, then it's time for you
to examine your situation.
> Never assume anything. Didn't anyone teach you what you make of "u"
> and me if you assume.
> <<You make a lot of assumptions yourself (i.e. All MLM's are bad).
> As we ALL do. It's part of being human, unless you are going to state
> you are from another planet, altogether. :-) >>
Again, see my point earlier about this forum and what is appropriate.
You are in a place where the focus is NOT on proving why some MLMs are
good. I'm actually growing quite concerned, at this point, about what
would happen to those coming in seeking shelter from MLMs. They'll see
one person saying MLMs are okay, or at least some are, and that same
person fighting strongly to support MLMs and the good stuff in them.
That is one major reason I continue this discussion. (Actually, I'm
rather disappointed that I'm the only person here standing up for this
point of view here. There are many people here who are quite skilled
at a debate and I can only wonder where they have been in the past few
months...)
>
> And yet, after getting burned each time, you kept going back to find
> another...
> <<I do what I think is right for my family. If helping feed my
> family means working 60 hours a week, keeping my kids in daycare (do
> you have children, by the way? Can you relate to this at all?),
> burning the candle at both ends by working a full-time job, raising 2
> children (including all the things that go with that; any parent can
> understand this), and taking care of a household (making breakfasts,
> dinners, helping with homework, cleaning the house, caring for the
> yard, etc.) BY MYSELF for sometimes weeks at a time while my husband
> is on travel for his own job is necessary, I really no longer want
> any part of it.
This is skirting dangerously close to the edge. It reminds me strongly
of Samuel Johnson's statement, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a
scoundrel." It's the, "I do what I have to do to protect my
family/clan/
getting into, "I have experience you don't, so I'm right and you're
either wrong or don't know what you're talking about."
No, I don't have kids. Do you want to play the experience game? If so,
I'll bring up living 24/7 with groups of teens or working to teach them
how to develop a sense of morality when all they know is that drugs are
good because they help you earn money or hide from reality. Does it
have anything to do with the main topic we started on? No. It
doesn't. Does it have anything to do with knowing how to make
decisions regarding the welfare of children in your charge? It
involves having to make far more dramatic decisions than where to work,
such as whether to use a restraint move that you know will send a kid
to a hospital or to handle it in a different way when he's choking you.
See, I can play the experience game, to, but it gets both of us nowhere.
It's not germane and it's not material to this discussion.
> Life is intended to be LIVED. Not to be WORKED.
That's your decision. Life is not easy and there are times where you
have to work 60 hours a week (and if you want to play the experience
game here, go ahead, I'm ready). Sometimes we have to work hard for
long periods of time to make it through. That's the nature of life.
It's our choice if we want to earn money through work that contributes
to society or take from it. You have essentially, above, justified
taking on any job that makes money even if it hurts others, as long as
you are doing what's right for your family. You've used arguments that
open the bottle and let that genie out by your statements.
> I
> first looked at MLM's as a way to bring some extra money home. Not to
> get rich. Not to have a huge yacht; but just to have a few extra $$ a
> month that I could tuck away for my childrens' college and future, as
> well as help pay bills. Not everyone gets into MLM's expecting to be
> a millionaire and live in a castle. I was looking for a way to help
> supplement my family's monthly budget. If that's criminal, then sue
> me. As far as I'm concerned, it's an attempt to create a little bit
> better of a life. And it works for me. However, I will still concede
> that I am one of the very few and far-between that has ever found ANY
> form of additional income from an MLM without hurting other people in
> the process.>>
Okay, I don't care why you looked into MLMs. I don't care why you
stayed in them over and over. The point is that you have stayed in
over and over, which shows that you have had blinders on, not just
once, but for 16 years. The point, my point, is that if you can go
that long and keep trying the same business model over and over when
it's not working, it is quite possible you still have the same blinders
on, or some of them, that you've had on for 16 years.
>
>
> I made money from the start of my business. Unfortunately, for the
> first six months, I made about $200 a month. But, hey, I was making
> money. I guess that qualifies. Making money is a vague and slippery
> term.
>
> <<I made money from the start of my business, too. After paying off
> my initial investment, it was to the tune of $200 - $300 per home
> show, on average.>>
>
> People often do things they think will have one effect when, in
> reality, it has another effect. If you make a profit on your
> downline's sales, it's possible that profit that goes to you and your
> upline and those between you and the downline person could eat away
> enough that they're not even paying expenses. That's one example.
> <<Who's not even paying expenses? Do you mean the company? >>
I'm talking about the individuals.
But don't bother answering. Why? Because what I'm seeing here is
something that started as "Don't blame the MLMs for your aunt's
problem." You took the chance to say, at every point, that she should
not blame the MLM for the problems. (You used such statements as
saying that many people who are not in MLMs declare bankruptcy.) I
stood up and said that you were out of line, and since then it's been a
justification of MLMs and your decision to do it.
Why do you have to fight to justify being in an MLM? You know this is a
blatantly anti-MLM group, it was stated in the ground rules. You know
the tolerance of pro-MLM comments is very slim, yet you seem to have a
need to prove that MLMs are okay and that you made a good decision.
The more I read your posts, the more it looks like you are trying to
somehow get someone here to tell you it's okay.
That's not happening, is it? You're not going to be able to, in the
context of this group, to justify being in an MLM that you say is
working (and if it is, take Paine's challenge and show us).
I can't speak for the group. I can say that I've had some email telling
me that I'm not the only one that thinks some of your posts are
inappropriate for this forum. I can also say that I feel any posts in
support of MLMs are inappropriate. I've responded so far because I
felt it was a good chance to make the point that much of your reasoning
was faulty and in the style of MLMs. At this point, I just feel I need
to say, "Enough is enough." I won't respond on these topics because I
don't want to provide you with other chances to attempt to justify your
involvement.
Hal
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment