« Monday Reader Mail: 43 | Main | - AVOID THIS GROUP AT ALL COSTS »
May 17, 2005
Justice Prevails at Yahoo
By QBlog in Web Initiative
In case you missed it, the Yahoo Incident is officially over. This site is once again appearing in Yahoo's search results thanks to email complaints sent to Yahoo by concerned readers. I sincerely appreciate your show of support and without your efforts this injustice may have continued indefinitely. The good news is that your voices were heard and because of your actions a bold message was delivered to Quixtar — We Will Not Be Bullied!
A Brief Summary
For unknown reasons, Quixtar contacted Yahoo and asked them to remove this blog from its search results. Quixtar gave Yahoo misleading information about my site and Yahoo acquiesced. After I was alerted to this injustice I contacted Quixtar and Yahoo to correct the obvious error. Last Sunday that error was corrected.
My Thoughts
I'm proud of this site. Proud of the Quixtar BLOG and webraw.com. For over three years I've gladly poured my energy, time, talent, love and passion into this site and done so without expecting anything in return. When I launched webraw.com I wrote a manifesto that expressed my "lofty goals" and described my vision of the "free-Web," a culture of sharing. That vision is as clear today as it was then.
During the last three years the popularity of webraw.com (and Quixtar BLOG) has grown tremendously. That growth didn't result from Google Bombing, Spamming, Link Exchanges or artificial SEO techniques. I attribute the growth to my fundamental Web philosophy — Build a website with fresh, compelling content and maintain it with care and integrity and it will eventually get the attention it deserves.
Part of that attention comes in the form of search engine rankings. A site that has a high rank gets preference over lower ranked sites for relevant keyword searches. I guess you could say that webraw.com has earned its search ranking through hard work, building lasting relationships, producing compelling content, publishing with integrity and following the "free-Web" philosophy on which it was founded. And that's why I was enraged to learn that Quixtar had misrepresented my site to Yahoo and encouraged them to de-list it. Instead of spending the time and effort to develop their own site, Quixtar sought to indirectly destroy the visibility of mine.
I honestly don't care about search engine rankings. You may find that hard to believe but it's true. My anger isn't directed at Yahoo for de-listing my site, it's directed at Quixtar for misrepresenting my site and trying to suppress a voice it can't control. As soon as Yahoo understood what happened, they corrected the error as I expected. However, Quixtar has yet to apologize.
And answer me this — why is it that the so-called "Quixtar critic" takes the high-road while the billion dollar corporation resorts to deceit, vandalism and anonymous personal attacks? That's a damn good question isn't it? Anyone at Quixtar care to answer? I know you read this blog. Don't be shy.
Comments
In the interest of brevity, read the link from the above blog entry:
http://www.webraw.com/quixtar/archives/2005/05/yahoo_delists_quixtar_blog.php
Great questions CK and I'll try to answer them as fairly and honestly as I can. But please understand that I regularly receive a great deal of information that I can't reveal for various reasons.
1.) I know this and you'll just have to trust that I know this. If you don't trust it, that's fine. I will say that Quixtar will NOT deny their culpability.
2.) The misleading information was Quixtar's claims that my site violated Yahoo's Guidelines. At a glance, the uninformed may assume this to be true but the obvious reality is that my site has never violated Yahoo's guidelines and is in stark contrast with the obvious violations of Quixtar's Google Bomb blogs.
You're right to call into question my assertions. I would expect nothing less. However, I must simply ask that you trust that I know what I'm talking about and speak with knowledge that I can't fully disclose.
Trust... but verify *grin*
Taken from Q's standpoint, I'd be pretty pissed. Depending on your POV, some of the commentary from the critbots may in fact border on abusive *lol* - but overall, a lie on Q's part.
Nice that it backfired.
It had to be backfired. It was a lie.
And lookie at google. QuixtarBlog still #1.
Google and Yahoo are run and operated by pros. Not Sock monkeys.
Thank you, Qblog, for attempting to address my questions.
You are saying that you have some kind of insider knowledge (you mention specifically that Q made claims, and go on to specify these claims), but can't reveal your sources, then?
Can you tell us with which company (Yahoo! or Quixtar) your unnamed source is allied?
Sorry, I have reasons for needing to substantiate any claims I intend to repeat (and this one is a beaut), but won't repeat them if I can't prove it...otherwise, what differentiates me from a tape-speak spouting AMbot?
Thanks.
quixmire wrote:
In the interest of brevity, read the link from the above blog entry:
http://www.webraw.com/quixtar/archives/2005/05/yahoo_delists_quixtar_blog.php
Quixmire, I read the entire blog entry and comments, as well as the entire thread on the forum. I was asking for evidence.
I think that is VERY imortant, because if I say to the pro-quix people in my life "well, Quixtar is shady, and I believe this because among other issues, they tried to manipulate Yahoo!", the anticipated response is "no they didn't, that's another lie from the bathroom walls of society".
None of us should suspend critical thinking just because a motive or action seems obvious, or supports our opinion or POV.
I am satisfied that the information is correct. Unfortunately, without names or recorded conversations or copies of memos, it's just testimony from an unindicted co-conspiritor (according to those I wish to convince)...I only wish they dedicated so much critical thinking to analyzing 'the business'!!
yes, CK, sorry, I see now what you were after. My apologies for sounding short.
I do appreciate what you're saying. For my own part, I tend to trust Qblog for this reason: if he lies, he will certainly be taken to court and lose.
On the other hand, if Quixtar lies, what immediate consequences will there be?
I always look at this stuff and think "who has the motive".
Too many cop shows, I guess. ;)
Quixmire, you're right...qblog has no real motive to lie, and plenty of motive (your lawsuit example) not to.
Unfortunately, the amquix people in my life are so drowned in tape-think that their response when I have said that before is "Quixtar would never sue anybody, because they're so wonderful, and they don't care what is said about them on the bathroom walls of society". Then, when I show them the lawsuits (and Google bombing, which proves they DO care), the response is "well, they had to defend themselves", or "that was another LOS, not mine, which is the right hand of God", etc...
It's less about what I believe, and more about what I can prove in an 'intervention' (maybe we should start a 12-step program for getting off the kool-aid!!!).
Hey Qblog, do you make any money on this site? Any at all? Just wondering. Oh, and whatever answer you give, I'll do my best to blindly trust you. You know, to have "childlike faith". I'll just take your word for it.
It is a little ironic, that you think I shouldn't trust the people who have a vested interest in MY success, in a business that I've Seen work with my own eyes, but I'm supposed to blindly trust you, someone who blasts that business and is really just trying to destroy it.
Hey whats the link to your Mary Kay blog - I'd like to check that out at my leisure.
TC> It is a little ironic, that you think I shouldn't trust the people who have a vested interest in MY success,
Imran> Are the really interested in your success? What if you do some other business and don't do Quixtar. Will they be still interested? Tell them if they'll help you if you switch LOS.
If they are interested, do they give free training to you? Or charge it?
TC> in a business that I've Seen work with my own eyes, but I'm supposed to blindly trust you, someone who blasts that business and is really just trying to destroy it.
Imran> What exactly have you seen with your own eyes? Applaud? Cheques of gross income? Income tax returns? Solid financial data? Please tell. Then we'll see if it is a blind trust.
And no, don't trust this site. No body is asking you to. You came here all by yourself. No body bugged you in a mall or street to come here or did they?
TC- you take things on faith that you've seen with your own eyes (the success of your upline), but you don't see the downside- for one major reason:
NO NEGATIVE DOWNLINE
Which makes sense, for Q, because doubt is never allowed to creep in and fester.
Sites like this exist for that reason. This is an open forum of opinions, facts, suppositions, and yes, even vitriol.
Taken on a whole, it's a lot less one-sided than listening ONLY to people who have a vested interest in the status of your bank account.
In my business, I have accountants and lawyers giving me their opinions and advice on how to run my business (at least as regards their fields of expertise). I pay them for their services and advice, so I suppose that they do have a vested interest in my success- but I have the right to run my business as I will, and to choose to ignore their advice as I see fit.
You have the same choice in your business, save for the fact that my advisors are impartial.
And if I choose to ignore their advice, they won't:
De-edify me to my downline
Quit helping me
Cut me out of their business like a cancer if I don't blindly follow them.
How 'bout you?
Keith! What double speak! So do your advisors have a vested interest in your success, or are they imparcial? Which is it??
And no , I DON'T have to take the advice of my upline or do everything he says. I wasn't buying any CD's or books for the 1st 7-8 months I was in!! He didn't "cut me out like cancer" or "de-edify me"! He still showed the plan for me, he still sat down and game planned with me! Just a few months ago I had to miss a team meeting for a family function. He didn't do any of that BS you talk about. When are you gonna stop making assumptions based on what you heard from some guy, who heard from some guy!?
You said, "You take things on faith that you've seen with your own eyes"?? Dude, buy a dictionary. What are you even talking about? And yes, I Have seen negative downline.
You act like its bad listening to someone who has a vested interest in your success. Do you understand how it works? The better I do, the better they do. They want me to succeed.
And Imrod, I'm referring to success in this business! Of course if I quit to go buy a donut shop, they're not gonna take time away from Their business to help me make donuts!! And why would I switch LOS, when I've got great mentors where I am? But if I did, then I'd have That LOS helping me instead!
Does my upline give me free training?? YOU BET THEY DO!! What kind of ignorant question was that??
What have I seen with my own eyes? How bout lifestyle? How bout watching my sponsor's business grow? How bout seeing him buy a new car, and seeing copies of checks, how bout seeing pictures of trips the company pays for. How bout seeing ME get checks every month for the levels I'm at. How bout watches, jewelry, etc. How bout www.extremefreedomteam.com and peter island .com? Is that what you were looking?
"no ones telling you to trust this site"?? nImrod, I wish you would have read the original posts, cause this started with Qblog saying "I can't tell you, just Trust me".
Finally, sure I have the right to ignore the advise of my upline - but why would I want to! If they've got what I want, and they have an incentive to help me - I'm gonna take their advise very seriously!!
That'd be like telling me boss, "no I'm gonna do it my way";
or my professor, "no I think I'll read that chapter next week";
or my karate instructor "I really think that move would work better This way!"
Yea, good luck if that's your attitude!
Tony,
Just curious. Why do you post under different names and why do the posts you make under the other names seem more volatile than the ones you make as Tony?
Just curious.
Thanks.
People like accountants and lawyers helping a business are paid for their partiality. Or at least, that's the hope. If they are biased, either for or against you, chances are, their advice would be poor and it would hurt you. And you might end up in court over it, but that's another story.
Also, Tony, trust but verify. A check isn't a good measure of someone's profit. For example, I knew someone who was considering buying an art gallery in New York City. He had several checks or credit card receipts of $25,000 or more, as he would sell artwork ranging from $5,000 all the way to $50,000 piece. But upon closer inspection (tax returns and profit/loss statements), the biggest chuck went directly to the artist (60% to 70% depending on the agreement between gallery and artist). And then, what was left over went to pay outrageous NYC rent utilities, advertisements, security, employees, etc. In the end, the guy turned a decent profit, but not enough to justify his asking price for the gallery.
And that's why you need to look more then just at checks or take your upline's word at face value. Get the whole story, including the good, bad and ugly. In business terms, look at the profit/loss statement. See how much a diamond truly profits from Quixtar, what he gets from tools, and what he spends it on. Of course, diamonds will never let you see this information, but that's because most, if not all, have something to hide.
qblog, are you referring to the TC below? Well that time i used my initials, and I didn't think it was that volatile. Of course I'm sure if anyone else posted under more than one name on the same IP, you'd put that up too, just to be impartial, right? Oh, and just out of curiousity, can you address the question that I posted as TC - do you make any money at all from this site? Just curious. Oh, and Honestly, sometimes I just like to jab back a little while enjoying a little anonymity. That's all.
Oh, and dmm, not to sound too sarcastic, but try going to your boss, and ask to see a copy of all his checks, and travel expenses, mortgage statement, credit card bills, etc. because you're trying to decide if its worth it to work there and aspire to have his position one day. Yet you expect the Diamonds to do so.
I think a Diamond making $15, - $50,000 a month doesn't have to spend too much on tools. I don't think his expenses for travel, tools, etc. are gonna put him under. I think the fact that they're able to live in 2 million dollar homes, wear $12,000 watches, drive $200,000 cars tells me that this is real. But yes, you're right this could be an act. Quixtar could just be paying these people to act like there rich. They could be just each be wearing the same watch. Driving the same nice cars, etc. But seriously, I understand your point. I'm all for being informed, and having proof. But there comes a point when you just have to say, man, thats one heck of a lifestyle. These people really seem to have fun, and they genuinely care about other people.
When they anounce at a function that we raised $278,000 for Mercy Ministries, I don't sit there, and say, "yea right, let ME count it". Or yea, but I bet the Diamonds are just gonna keep it all."
There comes a point when that attitude is just counterproductive. Like I've heard people say "while you're sitting there looking for what's wrong - I just sponsored 4 new people, or broke another Eagle, etc".
This works, I've seen the houses, the cars. I've worn the watches, and rings. I've seen husbands and wives treat each other better and improve their relationships. I've seen people sell XS to a few bars and make $1000 in one month. I've seen women come home to be full-time moms. I've Seen it dmm! I'm sorry you didn't.
Tony,
I stand corrected. I've now seen the error of my ways.
I apologise for my opinions. I am stupid.
Forgive me.
But Tony,
I wear the watch... I don't have to give it back when I'm done.
My wife doesn't have to work outside the house- she's a full time mommy.
I own a beautiful car (actually, God owns it, but lends it to me every day *smile*)
But I'm sorry, I'm still stupid. I'm not in Quixtar.
I'm sorry
Forgive me.
Tony>"no ones telling you to trust this site"?? nImrod, I wish you would have read the original posts, cause this started with Qblog saying "I can't tell you, just Trust me".
Imran> How did you make it nImrod? anyways. You didn't hear the whole argument. Some one asked QBlog the proof. He said his sources must stay un known and trust me.
So there, DON'T.
Btw read the original post. He got a hint from David Elliot. Heck, ur diamond could be his source ;)
Point is, 10,1000 posts here. In almost all, he provide references. Every good reporter has to hide his sources some times. And you are not too excited.
I wish you could be that critical to your upline claims as well.
And no, nobody said there is no money in Quixtar. Money is, for the top few. They take it from you, to "train" you.
Train they do.
PS: We have monthly meeting @ office where the whole situation is discussed.
Tony> I've seen women come home to be full-time moms. I've Seen it dmm! I'm sorry you didn't.
Imran> many of us seen and went trough the otherwise Tony. And most of these ppl will be out any way. Like Greg Duncan said 50% of his business fades away every year.
>>Oh, and dmm, not to sound too sarcastic, but try going to your boss, and ask to see a copy of all his checks, and travel expenses, mortgage statement, credit card bills, etc. because you're trying to decide if its worth it to work there and aspire to have his position one day. Yet you expect the Diamonds to do so.
Hey Tony, I know approximately how much my boss makes. I know exactly how much my CEO makes because we are a publically traded company and I'm a stock holder. His salary is part of the public disclosure paperwork I get every fiscal year. I also know how much my department brings in every year, and what my company brings in every day. It's not information I need to do my job, but it's available for everyone who works in the company, and we don't hide it.
And you know why? Because it is BUSINESS information. I don't need or want to know what my boss or CEO do with the money they make. I can estimate their taxes and see if their lifestyle fits with their salary, but their credit card payments, mortgage, etc. is of no BUSINESS of mine.
Neither is the mortgage payment of your diamond. However, their BUSINESS profit/loss statements should be your BUSINESS. Why? You are trying to emulate what they do, right? Well, how can you do that if you don't know what they make from their BUSINESS and what they spend on their BUSINESS. (See a theme here).
Real BUSINESS people share their tax returns or profit/loss statements to people interested in investing in their BUSINESS, opening up a franchise of their BUSINESS, or maybe even opening up a similar or competing BUSINESS. As mentioned before, people intersted in opening up real franchises will get an offering circular with numbers from corporate, and a saavy business person will look to find a store open in a similar demographic area and talk to that franchisee and ask to see the books. It's called due diligence. And it is good BUSINESS practice.
And I wonder if you did or still do your due diligence when it comes to Quixtar, Tony. You seem to take your upline's word as is without verifying whether or not he has is facts straight. I've shown you several of your upline's statements either to be misleading or out and out lies (such as the FTC approves the 6-4-2 plan or 98% of retired Americans are broke and reliant on family or charity). What other statements do you think your upline is either lying or stretching to make his point.
But it doesn't matter to you, Tony. You're completely plugged in and bought everything your upline(s) shovel hook line and sinker. And for that, I feel sorry for you. I've been online and participating in Quixtar forums/message boards/blogs for nearly five years, and have talked to several people just like you are. And you know what, in time, they either do one of two things. Disappear into the void that is the anonymity of the net never to be heard from again, or they come back months or even years later and admit that they eventually saw the light, quit, and can't believe how brainwashed they were as an AmQuixbot! I have little doubt, Tony, you will suffer the same fate as the thousands, if not millions of IBO's who signed up before you and quit, deeper in debt and no closer to financial freedom then when they started.
Or, you could shock me and prove me wrong, and be the first Quixtar only diamond. At which point, I hope you could prove to me your tool income was only $100,000.
Keith re-read what you wrote and then look up the word faith. I wasn't calling you stupid, but that wasn't the brightest comment.
Oh and I wear a nice watch too, just not one that costs $12,000!! Do you? Do you wear THAT watch?
And I'm glad your wife stays home to raise the kids. Thats not the case in 80% of American homes. Thats why I do this business.
Imran, I did read the whole post. Qblog was saying trust me, and then you say, "no ones telling you to trust this site". Blatant false statement. I don't care if he's protecting a source or not, I don't blindly trust anything that comes out of qblog's mouth, no offense dude. I just don't agree with your stance. The only reasn I post here, is because I know people find this site and then get turned off, That's the only thing wrong with this business. I hope they can see that.
Good luck to all!
Tony>Imran, I did read the whole post. Qblog was saying trust me, and then you say, "no ones telling you to trust this site". Blatant false statement.
Imran> Let me clarify. You can or can not trust. Really! By the way, he was saying to another person. Who is also a member of forum, and given their (online) relation, this is not that. He can explain better if he wants. And if it’s worth explaining at all.
What I tried to say was, he is not able to reveal his sources, so trust him if you can. Not if you don't. He is not asking any confirmation, acceptance for an open. No $$ transaction or any thing.
Point is, when he says trust me: You can or can not. It will be a lie if he gave false information and fake claims. But he’s not.
Tony> I don't care if he's protecting a source or not, I don't blindly trust anything that comes out of qblog's mouth, no offense dude. I just don't agree with your stance.
Imran> I hope you use this reasoning in every thing. No blind trust: Research. But in some other post you (or perhaps some other IBO) said you won’t research if diamonds say they give this much donation. Hmm, who is biased here? My reason is to believe him only because Quixtar has the motive. Or they haven’t?
Tony> The only reason I post here, is because I know people find this site and then get turned off, That's the only thing wrong with this business. I hope they can see that.
Imran> Yup, good idea. I like people expressing their opinion openly, asking questions etc. This is not a bad thing; it's a very good thing. Once they read enough and decide to join it, I really don't care. Good for them!
Tony- although I can be sarcastic, I try to do it in good fun- if it goes over the top, I apologise.
I would prefer to be known for my "dry wit".
I don't know if you have noticed, but I work at avoiding ad hominem attacks. I won't tell others not to partake in the trench warfare, I even sometimes laugh at the over-the-top fighting- I just don't want to do it myself.
My advisors have a financial interest in my businesses only to the extent that I am solvent enough to pay their bills *lol*, no inherant contradiction there, I hope.
Faith:
"Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence."
I would argue that eyewitness testimony is often the worst "proof". I'm going to go out on an arrogant limb and tell you that you apparently do not operate on the same intellectual level as I- the sentence to which you refer makes total sense if you read it in context.
I said: "you take things on faith that you've seen with your own eyes (the success of your upline)." This was my attempt to restate a portion of your delaration that:
"It is a little ironic, that you think I shouldn't trust the people who have a vested interest in MY success, in a business that I've Seen work with my own eyes, but I'm supposed to blindly trust you, someone who blasts that business and is really just trying to destroy it."
Hence, eyewitness "proof" that these folks are:
a) Doing as well as they say.
b) Their business is growing as fast as they claim.
c) That their relationships with their spouses is as solid as they say.
d) That the underlying business model is as good as they claim -and in addition- that all of you can acheive the same level of success that they say they enjoy.
I call that faith.
I hope that this clarifies my sentence.
Please cite your source for the statement that "in 80% of American homes, wives do not stay home to raise their children" (paraphrased for brevity).
Briefly, on the posessions stuff:
I've done well. Yes, I have a couple of very expensive "things". It's just stuff- the residual of hard, smart work that created income. "Stuff" is not my God - if He wants, He can have it all back, anyway... I've always felt uncomfortable using posessions, or "check waiving" (BTW, the FTC uses that very phrase and it's illegal) as motivation. It works for some, and can be very motivating to others. But that kind of motivation is cheap, tawdry and unfortunately short-lived, in my opinion.
Just another thing that I don't like about certain aspects of Q, and MLM in general.
Imran, I have a 2nd degree blackbelt in Tae Kwon Do. Now you can either take me at my word, or not believe me. But are you really gonna try to locate my school, call my instructer and ask him to fax you a copy of my certificate before you believe me? If thats how you operate, then fine. Thats not me dude. If my Diamond tells me that the group raised over a quater million for charity, I believe him. BTW, they don't Ever boast on how much They give to charity, but if they say they do, I believe them. I don't trust Qblog. He's got an obvious beef with Quixtar, I think its unsubstantiated, and therefore I don't take on blind faith what he says. If a Diamond tells me they had the best steak on Peter Island, I don't ask to see his dirty plate. Call me brainwashed, I really don't care.
Do I take everything on blind faith, no. If they said, "hey go to this conference and you'll make 1 million next year", now I'd think "thats a bit of an exageration". But guess what, they don't say that kinda stuff!! But if all you are is skeptical, I don't think you're gonna get too far in anything. If they bring up a 23 year college student and ask him, "so how many platinums you got, and whats your best month so far?" And he says, "I have 2 platinums, and my best month was $23,000", I don't think "ah, he's probably lieing.
And Keith, are you reading this? So we can't win! We've got people saying "show me the money", and then guys like you saying "oh, I think it's cheap and tawdry to be waving checks around." They don't do it to show off!! They show it, so people aren't like "well much do you really make?" They show their livestyles, so that skeptical people like Imran see that they really do have what they say they have.
Oh, and I'll cite my source for 80% of American women work, when you show me where the FTC says it's illegal to show a check. You're not allowed to guarantee that anyone will make that much, but if a Diamond wants to give a copy of a bonus to his downline, there's no laws against that.
And also, faith is believing without seeing. Believing without physical proof. So you saying, "you take things on faith that you've seen with your own eyes" is an unlogical statement! You may have Meant something different, but that's what you said Keith. Perhaps you should have elaborated, but you didn't. So go ahead and try to insult my intelligence, believe what you want.
And I'm sorry, but when you say "I have accountants and lawyers giving me their opinions and advice on how to run my business... I pay them for their services and advice, so I suppose that they do have a vested interest in my success" and then you say, "[except?] for the fact that my advisors are impartial" - That's a contradiction!! The point is you Want to take advise from people who have a vested interest in your success! Dance around semantics all you want, just be careful your arrogant branch doesn't break ;)
(No hard feelings here, seriously, I also laugh at most of this stuff too. It can get intense sometimes, but I just agree to disagree, like some of my friends that voted for Kerry)
Tony,
Of course I read your stuff. Sorry about the intellect comment- again, the "dry wit" thing.
I think that I explained my line of reasoning in both statements you have cited; I don't know how I could make it any clearer.
Outside of our disagreements on some of the issues regarding Q, I know that I would like you if I met you personally. No hard feelings here. And remember, there are just a few things out in Quixland that I seriously disagree with- I'm one of the few critbots here that does not despise MLM on it's face.
In the process of launching a new company, the issue of check waiving came up. My MLM attorney stated that it was outlawed by the FTC. For what it is worth, many of the FTC rulings, findings, and guidelines have not been codified, but are interpreted in a court as they are applied in specific cases.
I do not know if there is actual case law on the subject of check waiving, but I will do my best to find out and report back to you.
All those Kerry supporters... I never could picture him as CIC.
BTW, my email addy works, feel free to drop me a line - I kinda noticed that you don't have a working email in your posting ID.
Tony> Imran, I have a 2nd degree blackbelt in Tae Kwon Do. Now you can either take me at my word, or not believe me. But are you really gonna try to locate my school, call my instructor and ask him to fax you a copy of my certificate before you believe me? If thats how you operate, then fine. Thats not me dude.
Imran> That’s not me either. It may surprise you but I’ll believe you. Really. But I’ll research the following.
Tony> If they bring up a 23 year college student and ask him, "so how many platinums you got, and whats your best month so far?" And he says, "I have 2 platinums, and my best month was $23,000", I don't think "ah, he's probably lying.
Imran> That’s my point. I’ll ask proof for it.
Why I believe you that you have a black-belt or do 500 pushups? I don’t have to make any decision that can affect the use of my energy, time and money based on that. You are a black belt. Great. If you are not, whatever.
You decided to put ur time, energy and money in the business, no matter how “Priceless� you say it is based on that 23 year old person. I really hope you research that as a business point of view and find out how much truth that claim have.
Have you ever owned a franchise or know some one who does? They might tell you about solid data franchiser provides to potential franchisee. All I’m saying is use as much “skepticism� or due diligence in private franchising as you do in public franchising. Do business as a business.
Tony> I don't trust Qblog. He's got an obvious beef with Quixtar, I think its unsubstantiated, and therefore I don't take on blind faith what he says. If a Diamond tells me they had the best steak on Peter Island, I don't ask to see his dirty plate. Call me brainwashed, I really don't care.
Imran> I really want to know what “beef� does he hold up against Quixtar? Can you please explain it? Also how it’s unsubstantiated?
Tony, frankly I don't care whether or not you have a black belt or not. While I find martial arts interesting, I'm not that interested in learning about them. Therefore, the fact that you have a black belt is of no interest to me. It's why I don't care to see your proof of your belt level.
However, if someone were intersted in martial arts and wanted to reach the same level of you and possibly learn from the same instructors you had, would you not show him proof? Either by showing your certificate and/or giving the person a demonstration?
Now making money is something that does interest me, as it does most people. It's why I first did research into Quixtar once the opportunity was presented to me. And what I found distgusted me so much that I'm not vehemintly anti-Quixtar, and profess my opinion in appropriate forums.
"Fake it till you make it." I've heard it and seen it in action. I've also read reports like the Blakely Report and books like "Beyond the Smoke and Mirrors" and "Merchants of Deception." I've talked to several people once invovled with AmQuix from the bottom to the top to come up with my opinion on what I believe to be a scam.
Now, do I believe everything that comes from anti-AmQuix people? Of course not. I still require verification and while I trust what QBlog says, his word alone isn't enough for me to have proof that Quixtar meddled with Yahoo search rankings. Because I believe QBlog is telling the truth, I believe it happened, but I agree, until QBlog releases his source, I have a level of skepticism.
Mr. Keith mentioned check waving.
I just wanted to throw in.
Whether the practice is illegal or not, I found the practice of "copying bonus checks" deceiving during the old days of Amway when checks were distributed from the Directs down to the lowest distributor.
Showing a Direct(now Platinum) check before you deducted the pay-outs down to the lower line, meant that you were implying the full amount of the check was yours to keep.
Nowadays the downline pay-outs are deducted at the Corp. before you get your check. Everyone is paid directly for the volume they produce. (i know, some of the IBOs are still on the archaic system still)
But even while the check you receive today shows exactly what Q is paying you, that still means you have, if not a legal, but a ethical obligation to state that this is what YOU made and in no way guarantees the downline would make that amount.
EVEN if they did the EXACT work you did.
Keith, by the way, don't you have a blog...could you email your link to me?
ya pidoras, pizu chujie doors, zaabuzte moi url - http://greatpharmacies.com/ a suda pishite pisma i spamte - admass@pisem.net
In the interest of fairness, I have to ask a few questions:
1) While it seems obvious that there were some underhanded tactics, could you please tell us how you know for a fact that and agent/employee of Quixtar contacted Yahoo! ?
2) What was the 'misleading information' given to Yahoo!, and how do you know this?
Thanks.
Posted by: CK | May 17, 2005 8:30 PM