• I was conned into meeting with an ACN representative under false pretenses, and blogged it. I don’t like the way ACN does business because it exploits family relationships, desperate and/or naive individuals, and the products don’t seem valuable.
• I wrote a letter to the ACN representative trying to tell him my point of view — only fair after I’d given him 2 hours to tell me his.
• Francis issued a sarcastic reply, so I reiterated my main point.
• I started to discover documents around the web detailing ACN’s marketing techniques, and these tended to validate my position.
• People started reporting on me in a seemingly half-positive, half-snide kind of way. I start to react in a fairly snarky way. Words make me feel powerful because I’m a paraplegic. But hey, I’ve been cynical before and usually been right.
• I found out that the ACN video phone is nothing special, certainly not the exclusive, revolutionary item that ACN is trumpeting it as.
• End of story, right? Nope. Because now I’m the #2 hit on Google when you search for “acn video phone“!

Most recently some readers began criticising my rhetorical style, claiming I’d been particularly unfair on one commenter and that this had discredited my arguments in their opinion.

That’s a shame, because I’m really quite obviously correct about ACN, even if I’m not correct about the motivations of certain commenters (and that point remains to be proven one way or the other).

(I would point out that if a commenter criticises me and also runs an ACN-based business, as the person in question does, I’m entitled to assume they’re biased)

So now! Another great and worthy comment criticising my overreaction to someone’s comment and failing to engage critically with my main point. I see a pattern forming.

Interesting that you would respond in that way to Ravi and have to agree with matsonian about the manner/tone in which you required acknowledgement of/for yourself in a prescribed manner and yet could not return the favour.

You, sir/ma’am, write like someone trying to sound smart! And failing!

At what point did I “require” anything from Ravi? And in a prescribed manner? Uh, nope.

Reeking with sarcasm and cynicism, why is it so hard to allow Ravi his freedom to be an entrepreneur (obviously) for his business?

I’m sorry, I didn’t realise that I was preventing Ravi from being an entrepreneur!

Well in that case: Ravi! You are freed! Quit your cage and fly, my pretty, and be an entrepreneur!

I was under the mistaken impression that I was telling him his ACN-based business generates little value for resellers or customers but rather plays on people’s desperation and nativete. My bad.

Whoops! There goes that sarcasm again.

Note that I don’t have a personal problem with Ravi, I just think he’s got a conflict of interest. I have a far bigger beef with ACN, though it’s still not something I ever think about unless someone comments on my site and I have to write another one of these articles.

And there is always a prescribed manner in which one does things in their work regardless of what type of work, employment, career that person has… wouldnt you agree?

I have no idea what you’re asking. You are being way, way too general.

If you’re talking about moral principles then yes, absolutely I would agree. For example, I think that lying and/or misrepresenting the profits that can be made from a home-based business by a global megalith like ACN is morally wrong.

I think that business should grow and individuals in that business should become wealthy based on the direct generation of value for consumers, not by selling someone a dream that is extremely unlikely to come true.

Life is full of dialogue and prescribed ways so in all fairness – live and let live ..?

I am living and letting live. In what way am I not? By writing about someone’s comment on my site that I own? You realise I actually approved his comment to go live, don’t you?

It’s not like I’m following this guy around or anything. I haven’t even sent him an email! How is that not living and letting live?

You’re weird, man.