On Tuesday 29 May 2007, Dawn _ wrote:
> This will be my last post regarding the fact that I believe that not
> ALL MLM's are "bad". I've sat on a few e-mails from Hal regarding
> just what to say, and quite frankly, I'm as tired, trying to get my
> point across as he is, trying to get HIS point across.
>
> At this point, I am going to agree to disagree.
>
> I do have a few points I would like to address, though, as my last
> post regarding "pro-MLM" (as I am so referred):
I was going to let this pass, but so many of these points show a
misunderstanding of this group, its purpose, and other statements that
have come up that I felt the errors just had to be addressed. I don't
expect a response, but I feel through this entire continued exchange,
statements I've made or statements about this group have been ignored.
In other words, a valid fact or a point of solid reasoning has been
cast aside for a groundless emotional argument. While emotional
arguments can make someone feel good or bad about what they're doing,
they have nothing to do with the truth of what is happening. I'd like
to just "let it go," but I have a real issue with basing beliefs,
actions, perceptions, or decisions on inaccurate or incorrect
information.
> First, I find it grossly disturbing that I have been screwed,
> myself, in MLM's, to the tune of thousands of dollars, lost
> relationships, lost time, lost self-esteem (among other things) and
> have stated that MANY times, yet no one has ever asked, "So what do
> you think sucked about Mary Kay?" or "What did you find ridiculous
> about Amway/Quixtar?
> source of income?", etc. Instead, I am faced with spending my time
> defending myself because I feel that there may be one or two out
> there somewhere that might just actually "work" (i.e. create an
> income without hurting others in the process). In other words, the
> focus has been, with regard to my own experience, my thought that not
> ALL MLM's are bad; it's as if my own past bad experiences with MLM's
> means absolutely nothing.
While you've said it, it's always been part of a "but", such as, "Yes,
Mary Kay was bad, BUT my MLM is good." It may not have been that
obvious in all cases. I'm just giving a one sentence example.
> As my husband says about people in general: "One 'oh shit' cancels
> out 500 'atta-boys'.
>
> And, yes, I do agree with the concept that "pro-MLM" talk may be
> hurtful to those who are trying to kick the MLM habit. I agree
> completely. I guess I just felt defensive when I was being trashed
> about my own opinion and was defending myself more than I was
> stressing the "bad" in MLM's. My fault. I'll accept that. I wasn't
> trying to steer anyone toward MLM's; I was simply defending my own
> thought that it's nearly humanly impossible to say ALL MLM's are bad
> because there's no way that someone could have first-hand knowledge
> about them all...new ones are popping up every day.
You were not being trashed. You were being confronted with the points
that were not logical and did not follow reasoning. Search the
archives for a title with "Logical Fallacies" in it and read that and
related threads. In most cases your reasoning crossed the line of some
of those fallacies of reasoning. Some even included what amounted to
ad hominem fallacies.
> Secondly, in the rules, there is no place that says, "No
> pro-MLM'ers are allowed". It simply says that any pro-MLM'ers should
> expect some backlash. And, rightfully so. And, maybe that portion of
> the rules needs to be re-thought. For as much as I am hearing, "Yes,
> we should have opposing viewpoints here...", I am still being shot
> down with statements which basically say, "Why is she being allowed
> so much voice here" and "Why aren't others shutting her up".
The main purpose of the group, and this is brought up over and over and,
as far as I remember, is in the original documents new members are
asked to read, is to help those dealing with trying to get out of MLMs,
those who have gotten out and are dealing with the loss of friends and
a lifestyle, and those dealing with MLMs. Yes, it helps to hear a
different viewpoint, but the point of the group is to deal with those
situations. It is not to say, "This is a good MLM," or, "Not all are
bad, keep trying to find the one that works." This is one of the few
(or perhaps the only one) I've ever seen where the group is based on a
non-PC point of view. From the beginning the point of view of this
group is that MLMs are not good.
That you feel you are being "shot down" with statements like you
describe might be a strong indicator that such input about the
positives of MLMs are NOT appreciated here. For example, I love wine
and go to a local wine store here now and then and get different wines
I've never tried. I like having a glass before I go to bed. A close
relative is a recovering alcoholic. While she was detoxing, going
through treatment, detoxing again, arguing with us, and finally
participating in AA and staying sober, I never went into a group of her
friends and said, "I just tried another white wine from Two Brothers
and really enjoyed it." It's the wrong place to talk about how nice a
wine is and she's the wrong person to tell about how much I liked a
particular wine. By that token, this is not the place to talk about
how one particular MLM is a good one.
> Which tells me that this group is more about people who share a
> common mistrust or hatred of MLM's, who want to tell everyone that
> "All MLM's suck".
Please read what you've been told many times and what I wrote above.
Yes, we mistrust MLMs. Why? We've all been burned, in one way, or
another. "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."
We've been burned and we've learned. If a snake bites you the first
time, that's being careless or not watching out, but if, after you get
bit once, then you learn that snakes can bite. If you do that, why go
somewhere and keep going through a tank of snakes to find one that
doesn't bite? Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
expecting to get a different result the next time.
> In other words, it seems more a place for a whole
> "misery loves company" setting, as opposed to people who are willing
> to share their experiences about their past MLM experiences, in hopes
> of steering would-be MLM'ers away from those MLM's that have proven
> to be scams or pyramid-type structures.
This is a PERFECT example of the faulty reasoning you have evidenced
throughout all our discussions. We don't like what you have to say and
someone confronts your reasoning, which, when confronted, instead of
facing it, you slide sideways, and we have a different viewpoint and
you decide, since it isn't what you're focused on, it's bad. This
group was invaluable to me when dealing with losing a girlfriend. I
know other people who have found this group a huge help.
Do you have any idea what a recovery or survivor's group is? Your
statements above prove that you not only do not understand the purpose
of this group, but that you do not understand what a survivor's group
is. I am not saying that as a personal attack or to change the topic.
I'm pointing out what this group basically is and pointing out that
your statements show you don't understand just what this group is.
This group is what it is, what it has always been, and *NOT* what you
think or want it to be. Rather than just saying, "You're wrong," or
telling you to get out, some of us (mostly I) made a decision to engage
you in debate. Why? Because much of your reasoning is based on
emotional statements, misdirection, changing the topic, and not dealing
with the facts and pure, cold logic. To be honest, you think like an
MLMer. You reason as a drone in any MLM that uses the "normal" MLM
flawed reasoning. My choice was to engage because one of my major
purposes here has been to point out the flaws in the type of reasoning
that MLMs use. You use the same flawed reasoning and have been a good
example of that.
> I thought that's what this group was about...a group of people who
> could act as a sounding board for others who are thinking about
> getting into an MLM; a group of people who would say, "My experience
> with X company was..." in hopes of helping someone steer away from
> that particular company because it proved to be less-than-honest.
Where did you get that idea? What statement anywhere was that this
group was here so we could discuss MLMs? From the new members
documents: "This club was begun as a forum for survivors of MLM
(Multi-Level Marketing) to have a place to talk, compare experiences,
and generally be supportive of one another." Read it. It's not about
comparing MLMs and finding out which is best. It's about survivors of
the MLM experience.
> I
> didn't expect it to be of the mind that "All MLM's are evil! Stay
> away from them all! And if you believe that one might work, you're an
> idiot." How different is this from cult-like MLM's who allow you to
> believe only THEIR way of thinking?
Refer to my earlier comments comparing this group to AA.
As far as one working, we're waiting for you to post proof yours works
through Paine Webber's challenge...
> It's that whole, "Think like us, be like us, or be gone" mentality.
Yes. And we admit it. It's in many posts and it's come up many times
and it's come up since you've been here. Just what part of it did you
miss?
> This is a forum for exchange of opinion regarding MLM's.
Uh, no.
> Not a
> structured, 12-step-type program. (That wasn't meant to be a
> derogatory remark; just a broad...very broad... comparison through
> the comment Vicki made about AA).
There could not be more wrong with that statement. While it's not a
structured 12 step program, it is a survivor's group, much like that.
As for any reference about derogatory -- how could a reference to a 12
step group be derogatory. There is, for example, no one I have more
respect for than a recovering alcoholic who stays dry and who deals
with his/her issues. Yet, on the other hand, there are few I have less
respect for than an alcoholic in denial over his/her issues.
...
> So my own expectations of this group were not what I originally
> thought.
Here is a terrific example of loose writing and poor reasoning and not
thinking things through. Your expectations are what they were and
can't change. Are you sure you don't mean that this group is not what
you expected it to be?
I'm not being picky. I'm pointing out one of many examples of poor
reasoning, of taking words and not paying attention to what they really
mean. Why is this important? Because it is typical of MLM speak and
MLM thought. Don't focus on saying something clear or meaning
something clear. Go with what sounds good.
> I do have to say, though, that what I wonder about is this: if
> someone is absolutely "anti-MLM", does that mean that they want
> NOTHING to do with MLM's at all? I mean, do any of you have a
> Tupperware container in your home that you got before they started
> selling product in the mall? How about a Pampered Chef baking stone?
> Maybe some Mary Kay lipstick? How about some kind of vitamin you got
> from someone in one of those companies like Shaklee, or Herbalife (or
> whoever)? How about that picture or wall sconce or candle you got at
> that last home party you attended? Did you check out the latest Avon
> catalog that was circulating around your office? Or maybe you have
> one of those "adult toys" in your dresser from that fun party you
> went to at your girlfriend's house?
>
> MLM's have been a part of our lives for many, many years, and sorry
> to say this, but they're not going anywhere anytime soon. Sure, the
> scams and pyramid-type structured companies will be taken to court,
> or shut down, but they won't disappear completely.
Okay, at this point, you've gone from defining this group as what you
want it to be and lamenting that it isn't what you were looking for to
now sticking up for MLMs. Haven't a number of posts recently that have
stated that in response to your posts stated that?
Now you're doing what you always start doing and what people have
complained about you doing: you're going from whatever point you
started on and you're turning it to one or more pro-MLM comments. This
has also been one of my points. Even when Lori posts, you turn a
response about her pain into a chance to speak for MLMs.
The lady doth protest too much methinks.
I can only wonder why you feel the need to repeatedly veer off into
pro-MLM posts, unless the person you are trying to convince is not one
of us, but yourself.
> Because of this, I think it's VERY important that we continue to
> educate people on the pitfalls of MLM's and all the scams and pyramid
> schemes out there that are posing as "businesses"
> lost a great deal, not only monetarily, but with respect to trust in
> ourselves and others, relationships, and a myriad of other things.
> But, let's try to be open minded enough to not drive people away just
> because they think slightly differently on the subject, and not
> completely back someone into a corner so they feel they need to
> defend everything about themselves. That person just might have
> something profound to say that will impact ONE person's life.
The fact is that I've been here since summer of '04 and in that time,
almost 3 years now, I've seen many MLM people come in and not one, not
a single one, has met Paine Webber's challenge (and if you've missed
it, check in the files section under the "New Members" link. That's in
only 3 years. I know the challenge has been there for much longer, and
yet, not one person has found an MLM where they can prove they're
making what they say they are.
This is not a place to be open minded about MLMs. Personally, I'm about
as open minded a person as you'll ever meet. My very religion demands
it of me. I've read the facts, I've run numbers and I've gone through
spiels and examined their statements. I have yet to see any proof that
one is good. I thought you might prove that, but the way you talk and
reason has led me to question if you are making the money you think you
are or if you're doing as well as you think you are.
> Experiences will always vary from one person to another, as will
> opinions, which it appears is what this forum is about. But, having a
> different opinion doesn't make someone "wrong". It just makes them
> different. And for that, we should all be respected.
This group admits to a bias from the start. MLMs are bad. In AA all
alcohol is to be avoided. Here, all MLMs are to be avoided. You've
been told that and you've heard that. I remember in one of your early
posts this came up in a discussion (I forgot who mentioned it).
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