« Die Mike Furir | Main | Quixtar Chatter - March 10, 2006 »
March 10, 2006
The Pissing Match
By QBlog in Quixtar
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
-- From Hamlet (III, ii, 239)
I'm not interested in engaging in a pissing match with Billy Florence or his son Rich who, according to the RSS feed, is the real author of the Quixtar News: Billy Florence blog. A post from March 9 claims that I have "been publicly disseminating false information about Billy Florence, Rich Florence and the Qrush blog." Such accusations are false, misleading and inaccurate. Here's why:
- The referenced post (which was never linked for context) very clearly states that I've heard unverified rumors and that I have "no way to verify the veracity" of those rumors. That's a far cry from disseminating false information. There's an entire industry of rumor sites like Think Secret and Gawker that routinely speculate and discuss various theories, opinions and rumors about related topics.
- The post mentions that I made no effort to contact Billy Florence until March 6. How does he know that? Did he ask me? Nope. He's speculating. I actually exerted a lot of effort and was unable to find any contact information for Rich Florence. So I contacted his dad instead.
- Since I made no accusations I need not offer any retractions. It's very possible that Billy Florence is lying and that he's personally running the Qrush blog. Hell, I could be running the Qrush blog. Or Rich DeVos could be behind it for all we know. We simply do not know though some of us have some guesses.
- Show me where I made a factual error and I'll correct it promptly. Did I hear rumors? Yep. Is there reader feedback on the AmQuix site calling Rich a "high school dropout?" Yep. Did I explain that the rumors could be total bullcrap? Yep. So where are the factual errors? I'm not finding them. Can you help me out?
I replied to Billy's response asking him if his son is responsible for the Billy Florence blog. I haven't heard back and don't really care if I do hear back. Like I said, I'm not interested in a pissing match. If a Quixtar Diamond wants to mislead and mischaracterize what I've done then I won't stand in his way. The record is pretty clear. No secrets here. You read both posts and make up your own mind about who's right.
Apologies
And I just have to add this. What's with the Diamond fixation with apologies (see the Scott Larsen apology drama)? I never really cared for them myself. An apology is just words, I prefer actions. If you do me wrong, don't apologize, just quit doing me wrong.
What Others Are Saying
Comments
I think they like the apology posts because they can parade it to their downline saying "See the critics are lying, you can't believe anything on the net." Anyone can speculate about anything they like in this country. I think Billy needs to keep his apology from Scott Larsen and quit trying to go fishing for more.
Or maybe he's jealous that Jody Victor scored an apology and retraction from a Quixtar critic and now he wants one he can hang on his mantle. But there I go speculating again.
I LIKE the IBOAI crowing about Scott's apology.....
It was Amway's gloating about shutting down Sidney Schwartz's website that got me searching the internet to see what the "enemy" was saying - and discovering the truth about the AMOs and tool money. If Amway hadn't said anything, I might still be blissfully unaware.
Scott may have accomplished more with his apology, than he'll ever know!!
Deb
Wow, Victor and Florence sure seem to have it out for some people now-a-days. I wonder if this is going to be an on going campaign?
QBlog,
This is all very titallating, but does not accomplish much. Except to illustrate how mad Jody/Billy (why are those both little boy's names?) over painting over a picture or who's son graduated from high school or contributes to another blog, etc.
If we were discussing a religion, the central theme of discussion would be God. If we were talking about basketball, we would talk about shooting, dribbling, passing, defending, etc. In other words, the basics. We are discussing a business. The central theme should be money, that is what the basic element of any business is about. Sure, there are other aspects, but money is the main one.
Why can I (and many others) call "kingpins" lying cowards because of all of the money from the system and there is not a peep? Why can this primary economic profit driver, tool profits, of this business be lambasted and there is no response? This is why I started the "Tool Profits" topic, to discuss the central idea of this or any business. I suggest you focus on this, it is THE major topic of this business.
I again request you set up sections on this site to provide and defend a position, whatever it may be, in such a way it is not "covered up" by others. They can respond and discuss, but not "cover up".
QBlog, the ball is in your court.
Oh Billy, I appologize Quixtar is a scam, and I appologize every one knows it. I appologize Qrush turned out an idiot.
Tex -
Write whatever you want but it seems wierd to me that you are demanding the QBlog change his website/forum/blog for your purposes. Why not create your own?
Just because you feel the tool profits is the key that you want to discuss doesn't mean everyone does.
Personally, I don't care as much about the tool profits. I was aware of that. I'm more fascinated by the cult-like mind control. (Maybe I'll utilize what I learn to start my own cult someday...)
Inheriter
Dear Lord, what is up with the links in Billy's blog? Specifically here:
http://billyflorence.typepad.com/quixtar/2006/03/billy_florence_.html
The "problem. Quixtar" link in particular. Actually all of them. They just seem to link to other blogs that use the same phrase. How come there is no link to the actual product they are selling -- I was actually interested in the fiber bits since I love wheat germ (honestly), but there is no link.
Are some of his entries computer generated?
Sorry for typos, holding a sleeping baby.
inheriter,
Write whatever you want but it seems wierd to me that you are demanding the QBlog change his website/forum/blog for your purposes. Why not create your own?
Response: I am not demanding, I am suggesting an improvement. The reason I want to use this forum is because it is the most popular site, after quixtar.com itself, when you do a google search. My own site would not have near the exposure.
Just because you feel the tool profits is the key that you want to discuss doesn't mean everyone does.
Response: I am not looking for everyone to agree with me, I simply want a place positions can be taken and not "covered up" by other entries. I am okay with more than my position being represented. All positions should be able to be discussed/commented on, so it is open. But not "covered up" by new comments.
Personally, I don't care as much about the tool profits. I was aware of that. I'm more fascinated by the cult-like mind control. (Maybe I'll utilize what I learn to start my own cult someday...)
Response: Great, let's also have a "cult" section. I don't think it is a cult, although there are some elements that are shared. Have you ever seen an NFL football game, with all the fans painted and dressed up? Is this a cult? If A/Q is a cult, it is not a very good one, or more people would do what they are "programmed" to do and would be much larger, in my opinion.
Eric, you're being a little disingenuous. The accusation was that you are "publicly disseminating false information". You are definitely publicly disseminating it, so the only possible disagreement is whether it is false information or not. It's irrelevant if you identified it as an unverified rumour. Billy Florence clearly started it was untrue - this would make it false information, verified from the source. If you have evidence that Billy Florence is lying, why not just say so?
Insider,
Just because the source denies something, does not absolutely and automatically make it so. If this were true, we would have serial murderers deny charges and go free. Although this is not a court of law, it is a court of public opinion, and the first amendment guarantees these rights. This is no different than saying "according to White House sources", or "according to company sources", etc. The totality of a person's reputation will enter in whether to believe such rumors or not. In this case, Billy prefers to discuss minor issues rather than the tool profit abuse, so in my estimation, he has it coming to him. You can decide for YOURself.
Insider,
I began this post explaining that I'm not interested in a pissing match and I'm not. Nothing I've said is untrue or misleading. There are things on Billy's post that are untrue.
Make your own decisions.
I'm no fan of the QRush approach and I have no idea who is behind it either, but if you publish a rumour, and the people the rumour is about flat out tell you it is false, well it's no longer a rumour is it - it's a falsehood. Unless of course you happen to know the person telling you it is false are lying. In which case it's also not a rumour, because you have it as verified fact.
You can't have it both ways. Either you know it's true and Billy Florence is lying, or you've now had it verified as untrue, but despite this, and a request to remove it, still publish it as an "unverified rumour".
So which is it? Verified as untrue or verified as true?
Billy saying no doesn't make it truth. He's is "diamond" in a not so legal pyramid, scamming Americans since 1970.
QBlog saying Rich is Qrush doesn't make it so. Speculating is one thing, stating as a fact is another.
E.g. I think, I heard, rumors are Billy and Rich are behind Qrush blog is speculating.
Rich Florence is Qrush is stating it as a fact.
Insider,
No, it is a denied rumor. Perhaps it can be further shown to be proven true or false with additional verification, perhaps not.
Tex,
If you want those things in a site, go make your own. Don't come on another site and tell the author that they are doing it all wrong and that they need to add and take away certain things, especially if you don't have a site yourself.
Insider,
Qblog is simply speculating about who is what. To publicly post a rumor is no harm if you make it clear that you have no way to verify that information. Speculating is done in public forums all the time. Also, I think Qblog made it very clear that it was unverified in his post. Stop looking for picky items to complain about.
Truth,
I explained why I would prefer not to start my own site. The google search for "Quixtar" provides this site second only to Quixtar.com itself. My own site would not provide near the visibility. In fact, my opinion is my own site wouldn't be worth the low readership that it would provide.
Where did I say QBlog was "doing it all wrong"? I was making a recommendation to improve this site.
What things did I say needed to be "taken away"? None.
Tex, Truth.
Didn't QBlog recently ask for viewer input as to content design when he declared an overhaul of his site. Whether he takes Tex up on his offer or not is Q's perogative... but Tex is certainly entitled to make his suggestion, regardless of site revision or otherwise.
Hey Eric,
On my viewing of my stats and referrals to my site, I noticed someone searching for the terms "Eric Jannsen+Gay. I smell another patented Qrush Rant.
If I was the guy publishing Qrush, I WOULDN'T want anyone to know its me.
High School dropouts can write better than that.
As for the "pissing match", that reminds me of a sign I saw recently over an urinal...it said "Step closer boys, that aint a 30-06 you're shooting"
Me thinks that ole Qrush is "unarmed" for that type match.
Dave
Posted by: David Robison | March 10, 2006 4:44 AM