 |
 |
hi judith you wrote: >Mark Hughes probably erred in not stating up front >that he was involved with marketing this product. >However, had he done so, I have no doubt that he >would have been accused of blatantly pushing his >product. He was in a no win situation. i have checked his previous messages his 'father-in-law' was not mentioned in any detail until his business interest was exposed prior to that, mark made mention of at least three different products if his purpose in joining the list was to help his 'father-in-law' why would his first action be to discuss his products? my radar had been on alert for sometime have i tried to sell anything to the listmembers? have you? have any others of our current 1600 members? after seeing his websites, [which i stongly recommend, don't rely on my word only] i have serious doubts about the truth of anything that he has told us to call an unprofessional spade an unprofessional spade he has more 'scam' websites and associated lawsuits and newsgroup 'exposes' than a dog has fleas [i apologise to any dogs reading this] he is not just marketing the stuff [no offense to those innocent herbs intended] he owns several multi-layer-marketing companies >... However, I didn't think he was 'pushing' it. i'm not sure that i understand what you mean here as far as i could tell, he was trying to sell something, period >Nor do I like censorship, or dishonesty. >Unfortunately, when someone is 'set upon,' in >an open forum, a form of censorship is imposed. that is not censorship, it is simply aggression or a lively interchange of ideas if someone is pounced on or flamed they have every opportunity to make their position clearer if they so wish that is the miracle here no-one can 'shout me down' or 'shut me up' we all get to take our turn and we all have to take our turn if i feel guilty about being caught out at something illegal i might make a whole lot of noise and then take off for easier pickings [viz mark's barrage of messages] if i feel justified in my position i might stand and defend myself against all comers signing off the list and simply being timid about posting are two different things and reveal two different states of mind and dare i say two different attitudes toward PD >Surely we can disagree, or state our opinions without overkill. yes, we can and should disagree but who draws the 'overkill' line? and where? is that not true censorship? >Mark Hughes may have signed off the list in disgust. >And who loses? First of all, his father-in-law... judith, i doubt very seriously that his 'father-in-law' exists however, if he does, and if i were him, i'd be looking for help in places other than my 'son-on-law' your lively syber-sybling janet janet [log in to unmask]