Tuesday, December 13, 2011

You call this "free-thinking"?

As I remarked before, by NOT holding an extreme position, you get fire from both sides.

When when you point out one side's blind spots, you got labelled as "obstructionist, misleading, inaccurate" and other derogatory labels. 

So what was a "stream of false and defamatory statements" that this guy was referring to? I'll link to it and you can see for yourself:

The only "negative" word I have used is "fanatic", as in "don't argue with a fanatic". 

What is the definition of "fanaticism"? 

Definition for fanaticism:

Web definitions:
excessive intolerance of opposing views.

Yep, that's EXACT what it is. They are so convinced they're on the side of absolute truth (that is "self-evident") that they don't tolerate one iota of dissent. They are, by definition, fanatics. 

And the fact is they are such fanatics, they refused to be labelled as fanatics. When I quoted the definition back at them, my definition was deleted. 

And they claim to be "free-thinkers". Clearly, they mean "thinks-like-us-ers". 

Another item: they claim to be tracking the TVI Express scam:

Funniest thing: I posted that URL on their website. And they claim they're closely monitoring it. Must be AFTER I posted it, yes? Because you will find NO MENTION of TVI Express between April 2011, and November 2011. 

If they were closely monitoring TVI Express, how could they have missed an article published in South Africa back in AUGUST 2011? Or how TVI Express got its business license revoked in Indonesia, declared illegal in Lesotho, and various other developments? Clearly, they were NOT monitoring TVI Express (at least, not as close as I was monitoring it), and their dismissive attitude is merely a facade to cover their own lack of coverage on this scam.

If you point out something they missed, they claim they didn't miss it, they've been watching it all along. (Yeah right ) Clearly, to be a part of their "free-thinkers" one must pretend that DB and SS knows everything and choose not to share them, and then when someone else posts something agree with their claim that "we knew that all along."  

If you point out they said something that didn't follow logically, they censor your comment and claim you were insulting them, or they pull out some bogus logical fallacies, like "All MLMs are illegal because all MLMs are fraud and all frauds are illegal", when one cannot prove that all MLMs are frauds. When you ask them why all MLMs are frauds, they cite Robert Fitzpatrick, who, along with Dr. John Taylor, concluded that 99% of participants lose money. However, that doesn't in itself prove that MLMs are frauds. It just means that MLMs are financially bad for participants. It doesn't necessarily mean fraud (unless you define fraud as "losing money", which is way too broad).

I will go as far as saying that MLMs are always in danger of turning fraudulent, but I won't go as far as say all MLMs are frauds, because such a blanket statement is nearly impossible to prove (but not to these "free-thinkers", who even agreed that "MLM is not yet declared illegal in the US")

That's why I am an enemy to these so-called "free-thinkers". I won't go the rest of the way to agree with their extreme position. 

If you point out that censoring comments that in any way does not conform to their view is fanaticism, they censor your comment and claim you were insulting them. 

Does that sound like "free-thinkers" to you?

No comments: