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:

Here: http://randomrantsbykc.blogspot.com/2011/09/update-on-dbs-situation.html 10-SEP-2011

Here: http://randomrantsbykc.blogspot.com/2011/09/db-update-again-except-it-aint-db.html 10-SEP-2011

here: http://randomrantsbykc.blogspot.com/2011/09/truce-with-db-did-not-hold.html 12-SEP-2011

and here http://randomrantsbykc.blogspot.com/2011/09/ive-been-declared-persona-non-grata-but.html 20-SEP-2011

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. wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

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?

SpeakAsia: intent to violate the law in Bangladesh?

SpeakAsia was in MAJOR legal trouble in India, and the business basically withered on a vine in Bangladesh.

So it was surprising that some panelists are speaking about reviving it and run it as a NON-MLM company.

But they are keeping "uplines".

So already they plan to defraud the government: claiming they are NOT MLM when in fact they are. Why else would it have uplines?

5. If any one want to change the upline, then it would be allowed for 1 week or less

6. Speak Asia would run here as a NGO (Non Govt. Organisation) not a MLM (Multi Level Marketing concern)

http://www.thebhaskar.com/2011/12/speak-asia-would-run-bangladesh-as-ngo.html

When scams attack: using DDOS on critics

One of my most visited websites, BehindMLM.com, is down, and so did its companion site.

As it had worked for months and months without a hiccup, and today is on the eve of a MAJOR announcement in a scam it is tracking, either this is a terrible coincidence, or someone unleashed the "low orbit ion cannon" on it to prevent it from comment on the news.

If this is indeed what happened, this would be a SECOND time an Indian scam has unleashed a cyberattack on a website that criticized the scam. The first time was TVI Express unleashing LOIC on Ted Nuyten's website in the Netherlands.

UPDATE: FALSE ALARM

BehindMLM.com is back, apparently some sort of DNS screwup.

True Neutrals Get Hit on Both Sides

When one encounters a polarizing issue, it is difficult to stay neutral, as you are viewed as an enemy both BOTH sides of the issue.

Such as MLM.

My opinion on MLM is quite simple: it is an extremely DANGEROUS form of business that is just one step removed from outright pyramid scheme. (I'll link to the article later)  I will not dismiss it as an outright scam, as it *is* currently legal in the US and abroad (in most countries).

To the opponents of MLM, I don't go far enough. They want me to say ALL MLMS ARE SCAMS. Thus, I am the enemy as I somehow "validate" existence of MLM, even when I agree that most MLMs are scams.

To proponents of MLM, I am out to bad mouth MLMs. Thus, I am the enemy of MLM.

See what I mean by getting it from both sides?

Related articles

• MLM and Pyramid Scheme are outlawed by Islam (kschang.blogspot.com)
• What separates a legitimate MLM from an illegal pseudo-MLM scam? (kschang.blogspot.com)
• The American Federal Trade Commission has advice for real people looking for real opportunities (kschang.blogspot.com)

Perfect illustration for "Correlation Does Not Equals to Causation"

WTF?! Ryanair wants to remove restrooms from their planes

Apparently, having 3 restrooms for 189 passengers on their 737's is two too many.

And no, I'm NOT making this up.

http://www.everydaymoney.ca/2011/10/ryanair-now-to-remove-toilets-from-its-planes.html

Related articles

• Ryanair plan to remove toilets - leaving one per plane - to lower air fares (mirror.co.uk)

General comment about MLM and its supporters / critics

People who are involved with MLM generally comes in 6 types

• MLM Grunts
• MLM Stars
• MLM Coaches
• MLM Attorneys
• MLM Opponents
• MLM Critics

Each group have their own blindspots and strengths.

MLM grunts -- generally your "grunts", often addicted to MLMs, joining one after another always looking for the "big score", may even make some money, often believe in the MLM (no matter which one) with religious fervor. May or may not graduate to MLM upper level (see below).

Strengths: there are a lot of them, willingness to learn and earn
Weaknesses: often completely ignorant regarding the realities of MLM, such as what makes a MLM legal, easily lead astray by unscrupulous stars and coaches

MLM stars -- those with some recruiting skill and able to build a clique can take the clique from one MLM to another, probably spent decades in the business, and claims to make a comfortable living using his people skills, not sales skills.

Strengths: personal skills allows team building, knows most of the recruiting tricks and how to maximize profit in minimum time by leveraging his connections, have a bit of an ego
Weaknesses: often just as ignorant about the legalities as the grunts, often "raids" a MLM (move in, make a bundle, get out), ego often lets oneself get in big trouble with big mouth

MLM coaches -- "bottom feeders" of the industry... may be a direct participant, but often just use the "coaching" title to seek recruits for his or her current favorite MLM, teaches terribly obvious stuff, often advertise via Youtube and similar videos and generic capture pages. May also go by title of "marketing coach", "attraction coach", and so on.

Strengths: some may actually know something to teach, and some are honest about teaching
Weaknesses: most just want to get paid for "training" but don't want to get involved in MLM itself, too many of them impossible to check their bonafides, and most are just as ignorant as their students about MLM in general. Some "coaches" are just recruiters in sheep's clothing.

MLM attorneys -- they actually know the law that governs MLM, and advises MLMs on what is legal, and what is not. They sometimes also make observations about the industry and upcoming law changes.

Strengths: actually knows the laws involved: when they say it's illegal, it really is!
Weaknesses: has a pro-industry bias, as it is their livelihood, and can't really be considered neutral

MLM opponents -- i.e. "MLM is fundamentally fraudulent" critics, who believe MLM is just a pyramid scheme somehow legalized with minor differences. Examples include Robert Fitspatrick and Dr. John Taylor.

Strengths: have studied the issues at length, with sufficient documentation and such to back up a lot of their claims, hearts at the right place
Weaknesses: some are extremely inflexible in their views, and refused to even acknowledge the current legal state where MLM is legal, and pyramid scheme is not, and has a bit of tunnel vision

MLM critics -- those who consider MLM industry to be polluted by scams posing as MLMs, and are out there to  point out the "bad apples" before they tarnish the industry. Example would be Rod Cook, Troy Dooly, and so on.

Strengths: knows the difference between the legal, and the illegal, pretty close to genuine third-party as you will find
Weaknesses: has a SLIGHT pro-industry bias, as it must accept "MLM is legal" (which is fact) and use that as basis to root out pyramid schemes.

I consider myself a MLM critic, slipping toward MLM opponent, thus, I consider myself a true neutral in this mess. :D

This is my problem with DB, as DB is a MLM Opponent. In his world view, a "legal MLM" does not exist. Yet a MLM "critic"'s fundamental worldview is that MLM is legal, and pryamid scheme is not. Thus, somehow MLM critics and MLM opponents sometimes end up on opposite sides, even when both are out to bash pyramid schemes.

As for the rest, I consider the MLM Stars and Coaches to be... scum. Let me explain why:

MLM grunts don't know anything, and since they are always trained by coaches or stars, they will say whatever their upline (coach or star) say. And if the coach or star choose to tell them lies (or that was how s/he learned it: a lie) then the lie will be perpetuated. Most MLM coaches or Stars don't know much more than their downlines / recruits, esp. on the LEGAL issues. Some just use their skills to build a personality cult and get them to move from one MLM to another, thus enriching him- or herself at the expense of the members but blaming the members for their failures (I am doing great, why aren't you?)

Coaches are even worse. Coaches are basically grunts who thought they can make money by being on the edges of MLM without getting their feet wet. They often have NO idea what makes a MLM profitable or not, or even whether it's legal or not. Yet they want to teach how to recruit, how to generate leads, and whatnot, and get paid for teaching such things.

No doubt SOME stars and coaches are ethical, but I doubt there are too many of them. Remember, there is no barrier to entry in this field. ANYBODY can claim to be a MLM coach. At least with MLM star there's a bit of reputation you can verify, but that doesn't prove the industry is viable, merely that the star has interpersonal skills to form a clique.

What about MLM critics? We are often guilty of a bit of bias ourselves. We tend to look at the status quo, that MLM is legal, without examining the deeper issues (such as the concerns that MLM opponents raised and their research). MLM itself has fatal flaws that needs to be addressed, as it is very prone to abuse, until laws are passed and modern enforcement for financial crime beefed up, MLM critics will be too busy bashing the various pyramid schemes out there disguised as MLMs to study MLM itself.

And that leaves the MLM grunts as the real victims. If they run into a ethical coach or star, great. But if they ran into a scam disguised as MLM, or an unethical coach or star, then either this grunt will quit MLM altogether, become addicted to serial MLM, without knowing what's legal and what's not (never got trained in the right issues and knowledge), often aspiring to clone their upline, and so on.