MLM Bot Watch 12 - Chat about the tragicomical cultic racket of MLMs Forever Living, Younique, Jamberry, It works, (insert name of Utah MLM here) with posts by Eyes & jokes & desperate Bots

[lastuseraccount123]

facebook.com/timelessvie

facebook.com/liestopper

@TimelessVie

botwatch.blogspot.com

timelessvie.wordpress.com

mlmtheamericandreammadenightmare.blogspot.ca/2015/08/donald-trump-now-tries-to-rewrite-his.html - Eyes blog

now featuring Media Attention!

Forever Living lawyers!

Desperate spin tactics by Bots, who don't answer questions (keep your expectations low huns xo xo)

go!

MN are an unmoving commercial target. Posters are not.

In their position, I would be heeding my lawyers' advice as rigorously as I suspect they're doing.

To be honest acat I am beginning to wonder if there may be the odd MLM sympathiser amongst the MNHQ's.... It does seem weird that you can mention any other entity ie) kim kardashian (public figure, public social media, sells her lifestyle as her brand etc) yet that wont get deleted? Its just odd, some of the posts dont even seem to breach the guidelines?

I actually think it's sad that we can't name these people or share incriminating evidence, such as videos, without them being removed or taken down. These are the things people need to know. I would much rather someone googled a bots name and came her to gain real information than to be swindled out of money in the belief that these people are saints!

I don't think I did name specifically. I may have made a comparison between a blood sucking worm and a last name though #oops

Maybe you are right cozie but, whats actionable about reposting or directly quoting an individuals own posts/statements and publicly-legally obtainable information? It just doesnt add up..

From my web adminning experience any threats they've had would be pretty empty, because reiterating what was put in the public domain, by 'public figures' is neither libel, nor slander. I'm not sure if you can take someone to court for butthurt.

I don't know, Melaw. But then I'm not privy to said advice or to the contents of any 'objections' which might be made about - I suspect - a great number of posts.

*nor

Melaw21 I've just come off the phone with the Professional Standards Dept of a regional UK police service which lists a grand total of 27 officers and staff as being 'Herbalife Distributors' or 'Mentors' or 'Supervisors.'

The woman I spoke to was very sympathetic to my concerns and I directed her to the MN threads and various other sources of information. We spoke for about 35 minutes.

smiinky

I agree that I think MNHQ are a bit too trigger happy with their deletions. But I really think we are getting somewhere, even if it is 'death by a thousand cuts'. Someone needs to monitor this thread. The worst videos then get removed from (public) viewing. This takes time and effort on their part, and reduces the number of people that can see their 'training'. And possibly, possibly, may cause a few bots to re think what they are doing!

TV had had 30,000 hits recently, I think?

Guys don't criticise MNHQ!! Compared to nethuns they are positively saintly!
I asked nethuns why they did nothing to stop the rampant promotion for FL etc on their boards and they said they wouldn't stop them unless they were "made illegal"

Excellent eyes! Thats great news, we welcome this individual going through the threads, it may take a while and unfortunately MN are well over censoring everything now, but I recommend that they head back to the earlier threads which will still contain examples of the dodgy practices of certain individuals.

I dont want to critiscise MN throwing and maybe its a little unfair, but it just seems so wrong that this is an issue serious enough that lives are/have been ruined, yet we are sooo heavily censored from reporting on it? Have to agree with you about Nethuns though, waste of time over there... 🙄

If you are a rake, please save and share the image I just posted there!

I think MNHQ are so trigger happy that maybe they should become a bit more involved in this before they delete certain posts when an MLM rep cries like a baby. Because at the moment they seem to have sided a bit out of the fear of being accused of 'butthurting' some scamming twats.

*sided with the MLMs

I don't think these threads are as heavily censored as some believe, myself.

I did try to point out in one comment that was swiftly deleted yesterday, that reporting comments containg evidence of criminal activity, in order to prevent that evidence from being seen by the victims of that criminal activity (who are all potential whistleblowers and witnesses), is a criminal act in itself.

Honestly, netmums never delete anything I report on there! They are a hotbed of MLMs. If we want to give a parenting forum a hard time then head over there!

That said, I get the point that stuff that is already publicly available shouldn't need to be deleted

Yes, you're right throwingpebbles its their pub, their rules, we have to respect that, infact we always say, if we do get someone on the boards we admin, who wants to post things that contravene our FAQ's, to get a blog. Your pub, your rules.

cozietoesie I think you are right. It's remarkable what has occurred here of these threads, but this latest bout of swift deleting is annoying all the same.

The reason MNHQ delete the posts from FB is not because of the posts themselves, but because of all the people who post subsequent defamatory comments in the posts that follow.

For example, if bot is named in a post, then someone calls them a con artist in a subsequent post even if they are then both the poster and MNHQ have to be sure they could prove that claim definitively in court, if called to do so, or else they will face a big libel payout.

However, if the bot is it named in the post, then there is no libel because you cannot identify the person being defamed.

In other areas of the site, there is lots of defamation that is let slide. However, FLP have apparently made it quite clear that they are willing to take civil action if they are libelled. If you're up against a litigious company then it's worth protecting yourselves, as much as you can.

FWIW I think MNHQ have been extremely brave to let these threads stand, given we have no idea of the level of pressure they're under from FLP. They possibly have a public interest defence, but that's relatively untested and shouldn't be relied on.

Hello. Long-time lurker on these threads, fascinating stuff! First time poster though as I've recently a sudden influx of Slimming World nights operated by different people cropping up near me in small town suburbia. One venue near me has three different banners advertising separate nights with different hosts. Apologies if it's not, don't mean to offend anybody doing it, just wondered why so many in such a small area. I get a constant influx of flyers through the post because there's so many.

Also I nearly got suckered in to doing Ann Summers parties as a student and they seemed to operate on the same basis.

Keep up the good work, you're clearly making an impact!

LeanneBattersby

'FWIW I think MNHQ have been extremely brave to let these threads stand, given we have no idea of the level of pressure they're under from FLP. They possibly have a public interest defence, but that's relatively untested and shouldn't be relied on.'

I couldn't have put it better myself.

I have always made sure that I cannot be attacked for defamation, because of the comprehensive nature of what I have posted on my Blog. In other words, by explaining from the thread to the needle how cults function, if a cult tries to sue me, its bosses are only confirming the accuracy of my overall analysis.

It may be annoying, Eye but maybe it's best just to roll with it, broadly? Deletions demonstrate - in these circumstances - as much about the 'objectors' as any posters I reckon.