Facebook – DNC-Consulting

Random Thoughts

Standing here typing, listening to Garth Brooks, my mind will not relax to sleep. Reason unknown, but these thoughts seemed to need to be written, so here goes nothing:

Can a person have too much experience and too varied a resume? I’ve been a Jack-of-all-Trades for so long, but is that damaging my professional brand?

With a tour active-duty Army, a stint in the US Army National Guard, and a tour of duty active in the Navy, my SMART transcripts are thick with experience. Add in the correspondence courses, the moving from state-to-state in the guard, I have collected job specialties/Military Occupational Skills (MOS), and civilian experience to the Nth degree.

In Fourth Grade, I heard about Cracker Jacks, how they were specialists in being Johnny on the spot to fill the needs demanded. I have turned this into project, program, and change management, and supported it with formal and informal education. What is too much? How do I know when I reach that point?

Garth Brooks sings a song called “Ireland.” The song is more of a saga than a song, and it tells the story of an Irish Army, on the short end of long odds and outmanned. Since I first heard this song, it has struck those chords in my soul, reason unknown. Having been on the receiving end of long odds and understaffed, I understand the sentiment of this song on an almost spiritual level.

I’ve been in professional situations where I was the victim of lies, physical violence, and sexual assaults from both men and women. People who desire to make themselves feel better by making another person worse. I’ve been fighting bullies my whole life; bring it on. You cannot put the “Skeer” on me! Funnily enough, I sure have the Skeer on a LOT of others, mostly without ever trying.

Recently an event from the US Navy came forcibly to mind, one of the few times I put the Skeer on another person, then kept that Skeer up to the day I left the ship. I had a member of my chain of command physically assault me. I stepped toe-to-toe, looked him straight in the eye, and swore to the depths of my eternal soul that if he ever thought of touching me again, I was going to stuff his lifeless body into a saltwater compensated fuel cell, and all they would find of his remains would be atomic molecules as they went through the engines and into the atmosphere. He never looked me in the eye again, touched me, and left the space crying. I never touched him, but I got my point across.

I have carried the injuries from that day to this, and the VA refuses to acknowledge these injuries or their severity. The VBA continues to deny that a male can experience military sexual trauma from another male. But I put the Skeer on the perpetrators, and this comes with no satisfaction. The law refused to support me; UCMJ failed even to acknowledge these issues while punishing me for the smallest of infractions. Where is justice?

I was one of a tiny minority who was sent to Captain’s Mast (UCMJ, Article 15) proceedings, whose NCOER score went up after being sent before the mast. My lowest NCOER score was 3.5/4 during my entire enlisted period US Navy. But I could not get promoted, refused transfers, and was denied everything because I was “Too valuable to the command,” but this did not stop the command from sending me before the mast every six to eight months. I have scars from the bullies, but they never broke me!

Since June 2022, I have been pleading on my blog, LinkedIn, and Facebook for participants for my dissertation research. Unfortunately, the research participation rate hasn’t exceeded zero—more reasons unknown.

Have you ever sat through company training and a trainer made an impression, for good or ill, on your growth with that organization? Do you train others, hoping you are influencing the students in your classroom? Do your official duties include leading training efforts for your company? Please click on the link to enter the survey/questionnaire:

Employee: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GCUonlineemployeesurvey
Trainer and Front-Line Supervisors: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GCUcorporatetrainersurvey
Senior Trainer: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GCUSeniorTrainer

Have you successfully been coached or been the coach to another? What about mentoring? Have you received mentoring or been a mentor? Your insights are vital to my research, and I want to showcase your insights to other researchers to help improve company training programs. Please, join, and let’s change the world.

On the topic of the VBA, did you know you can have a VA provider diagnose you with PTSD and be denied VBA benefits? I would never have believed this was possible until it happened to me. The civilian provider doing the PTSD exam claimed a person could not experience PTSD unless they were in combat. If anyone knows how to successfully change the VBA’s mind, don’t hesitate to contact me. I need some help on this claim!

The inconsistencies in my claim baffle and bewilder me to no end. The abuse by the VA’s ineptitude and deleterious attitude leaves me thinking about running for office, if for no other reason than to stop the depredations of the VA. Any lawyers out there looking for a fight, itching to correct a wrong, and want to join?

I am almost finished with an advanced degree in industrial and organizational psychology (I/O Psych), and I am appalled by many of my colleagues. Not those in I/O Psych, but those in other psychological fields, psychiatry, and the medical field. I am not denying that kids (age 9-18) are often confused about their bodies and have fanciful ideation about being a different gender. Sometimes these thoughts and feelings need professional support to understand and cope. But recommending surgery to mutilate their bodies permanently is morally, ethically, and borderline legally wrong!

In following the gender dysphoria topic, I have read the heartbreaking stories of those who transitioned, mutilated, and then eventually came to themselves and wept for that which has been lost. Related on these blog pages are several stories of people I have known, who have experienced rape, beatings, and tremendous pain due to gender confusion, jealousy, greed, and a compliant medical industry hellbent on doing harm. Why?

I repeat my question, only for emphasis, if your actions are so life-affirming and positive for you, why are you so hate-filled, angry, and abusive to others? If the mutilation of healthy tissue is not immoral, unethical, and borderline legal, why the secrecy, silence, and walls of hate when approached on this topic? These are honest questions. The research does not support any conclusions; expect to plead for more research. Science is not settled on any issue, let alone the alteration of young bodies and minds.

Writing these questions and thoughts down is therapeutic. If they help you, I have accomplished my purpose. I close with a thought:

“Ask yourself the hard questions, never stop asking, and allow your answers to change as you do.” Colin Wright

I affirm in the strongest words I am not a victim, I am not the same person I was at 18, and I glory in the ability to continue to change. Ask questions, learn, and change.

© Copyright 2022 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images. Quoted materials remain the property of the original author.

Sermo Datur Cunctis; Animi Sapientia Paucis – Remind you of Anyone?

Distichia Moralia provides with keen wisdom the following, “Speech is given to many; intelligence to few.” After the European trip of US President Joe Biden, intelligence is in short supply in the White House, the staff, and of course, the US Media! Would someone please tell me how so many can say so much, yo-yo’ing from one point to another, and still make no sense? Honest question, the other day someone told me the patients were running the asylum, and I countered no, the clowns took over the circus. Both sentiments are accurate, but I detest clowns, and mental patients can occasionally do something brilliant.

Now, to be perfectly fair, little Joey Biden has a mental cognition problem that is more than likely some form of senility or Alzheimer’s disease. I am not entirely blaming little Joey; his spouse and handlers bear the full brunt of the blame and deserve their punishment for not allowing this senile old man to retreat to his beloved basement and finish the rest of his days in solitude and grandchildren. May little Joey sniff hair and massage shoulders in a creepy fashion after retirement to his heart’s content. But his handlers, the complicit media, and his spouse need to be hauled in front of a judge for elder person abuse!

From Australia’s Sky News, the BBC, Daily Mail, FOX News, CNN, MSNBC, and Jerusalem News, essentially covering the entire globe, every media channel worth a small moment is complaining about Biden’s European performance. Not all media channels are created equal, but to have them all complaining about Biden in Europe is pretty phenomenal. To have Biden walk back his handlers’ “clarification” and then renounce his previous sentiments in the same speech is nothing short of a full-blown communication failure.

To clarify, I do not care what you embrace for your political party. Any person with half a brain cell can observe what is happening and know instinctively that the elected leaders have no clue and even less intelligence. Worse, their intellectual ability for self-preservation is running on fumes and day-old flatulence. Truly, “speech is given to many, and intelligence to few.” Unfortunately, this is not the tip of the iceberg humanity is headed towards at full speed!

Satire is truth wrapped in comic wit and presented for discussion. Never taken seriously as supported by how many “shock” comedians? Yet, the Babylon Bee is removed from Twitter because some Twitter employees think they have a special mission from their god CEO Parag Agrawal to silence any voice they deem “hostile.” More people prove that “speech is given to many; intelligence to few.” Would someone please tell me how Kathy Griffin can parody cutting off then President Trump’s head, and she can maintain a Twitter account, but the Babylon Bee has their account suspended. Worse, Kathy Griffin, a fully non-humorous comedienne, got a Netflix special, but Dave Chapelle was hounded mercilessly for weeks because he told the truth and was actually funny.

Kathy Griffin, Dave Chapelle, Biden/Trump, Babylon Bee, Twitter, Facebook, Google, Apple, and others are tied into a Gordian Knot over the topic of controlling speech unconstitutionally. Whether as perpetrators, victims, or politics, every actor mentioned, especially those not mentioned, as this was NOT a definitive list, all share in the ongoing saga over the First Amendment.

A reminder, the First Amendment states:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The perpetrators who are pulling the political strings to hinder and thwart the First Amendment hide, like evil thinking cowards, cower behind the shield, “Congress.” Claiming that since they are not Congress, they only prohibit speech on their private platforms conditional as part of the “User Agreement” or as private citizens or businesses. Hence, limiting the speech of others is entirely legal, moral, and socially acceptable, intentionally muddying the lines between legal and illegal for entertainment or some other bloviated excuse. Except, what these perpetrators are doing is stealing freedom from everyone for personal profit.

What is “Hate speech?” Sure, the lawyers have concocted a definition for court, but in practice, “Hate Speech” is anything any person who thinks they possess a modicum of power deems it to be. Any tool that limits speech will be used as a weapon to beat people out of their rights and freedoms and steal the same to enslave all. The Supreme Court regularly hears cases on First Amendment issues, specifically speech. Of the five freedoms protected and enshrined in the First Amendment (Speech, Religion, Press, Assembly, and Petition the government), speech is the one most often attacked. The Supreme Court has wisely used the rule of thumb, “Screaming ‘Fire’ in a crowded theater,” as the basis for whether to rule speech as governed under the First Amendment or not.

Why is this a wise rule of thumb? Because creating panic in a population enclosed in a building should not be protected “free” speech as the consequences are dire indeed. But does this mean anything else goes; absolutely! A simple rule exists to explain why, “When you limit the freedoms of a single person in a society, the entire society loses ALL of their freedoms, rights, and liberties.” Democracy is messy! A constitutional republic is doubly chaotic! We, the citizens of either a democracy or a constitutional republic, accept this as a necessity to protect our individual rights, freedoms, and liberties.

This means when Twitter declares something as broaching their “User Agreement” and limiting one person’s speech, as a citizen of the United States, every citizen of the United States loses! When Facebook or LinkedIn practice censorship in the name of “socially acceptable speech,” they are thwarting the US Constitution and decrying they are the wisest of us all and intelligent enough to declare what is and is not “acceptable” speech in a public environment. When YouTube ends people’s livelihood because they do not like the content in a video, everyone loses their right to produce content free from burdensome oppression.

Chris Rock was free to make a joke about Jada Pinkett-Smith as a point of reference. Will Smith was perfectly in his right to first laugh at the joke and then choose to become offended. But, Will Smith’s rights ended when he took action and hit Chris Rock. Speech is a responsibility, and exercising speech properly means sometimes being held accountable for the speech made. Unfortunately, modern society has allowed people to make offensive and degrading remarks without accountability for too long, which is a problem. However, the solution is not to control speech by a business, company, government, non-governmental board/organization, etc. The solution is to remind people of the accountability inherent in exercising their rights to speech.

Speech is never “Free.” Free speech means no consequences to what you say, but the reverse is true, and speech has a significant cost! Ask any disabled veteran about the cost of speech, and let me know if they claim their injuries are free. Worse, ask any person jailed who made a speech if their speech was free, and tell me if their sufferings, depravations, and sacrifices were without cost. Chris Rock was entirely in his right to make an offensive joke. I did not find it funny. But could Chris Rock have been held accountable for his poor sense of humor without being slapped on international television; absolutely. But, name me another group of people who abuse the rights, freedoms, and liberties of others without care and concern than Hollywood. I know of no other industry!

Yet, Hollywood has taken it upon themselves to be the lords and masters over everyone else when they cannot control themselves. Solidifying the permanence in the principle, “Speech is given to many; intelligence to few.” How many known victims of Harvey Weinstein? How many unknown victims are living? How many dead victims? How long was Harvey Weinstein abusing his power to subjugate people to whet his appetites and passions? How many others are currently copy-catting Harvey Weinstein’s example?

The government has failed to police Hollywood, and Hollywood refuses to police itself, but how many in Hollywood are willing to insist that Hollywood needs a deep cleansing, an injection of values, morals, and law; not many, if any. Name another industry so rampant and steeped in villainy, depravity, and disgust that it can escape basic law enforcement. Hollywood spawned Bollywood and how many other incarnations in countries around the globe, all suffering from the same moral vacuum and creating the same social decay without consequence. Spoilt children, parading as virtuous adults, demand their rights, liberties, and freedoms, all while denying others the same rights, liberties, and freedoms. Demanding politicians, the same politicians fawning and feeding the Hollywood monster, to use the powers of government, and big business, to thwart laws for their own profit and gain.

Have you ever heard of a “Casting Couch?” In business, the military, and government, a “casting couch” is sexual harassment, a crime worthy of jail, heavy fines, and social scorn for the perpetrator. In Hollywood, the “Casting Couch” is regular business for those desiring to be in Hollywood, and the victims, if they speak out, are scorned and unemployable. The horror stories about the “Casting Couch” are depraved, disgusting, and the victims’ ages run the gamut, all with little to no consequences for those soliciting sexual favors in return for employment in Hollywood. The case of Harvey Weinstein ripped the scab off the festering wound of Hollywood, but Big Business and Government have helped keep the wound alive and infected, to the shame and horror of the victims.

Will Smith, enjoy the spotlight your actions created, and may the consequences fit the crime. Chris Rock, you’re still not funny. Wanda Sykes, you lost your funny. The Oscar’s is not worth my time and energy to scorn, let alone watch. But, Hollywood, your industry is sick, and the greatest crime is that your infection is spreading faster than a case of Chlamydia in the Playboy Mansion. Hollywood, you have lost any and all claims to tell anyone else how to live and until you clean up your mess, I will continue to refuse you my money. You might start by remembering, “Speech is given to many; intelligence to few.”

Do we Understand this Principle?

The First Amendment to the US Constitution claims the following:

What is the principle? “Prohibiting the free exercise, or abridging speech, through the use of government mandates.” The government is not supposed to be picking winners (acceptable speech) and losers (unacceptable speech). More to the point, neither shall ANY private business, non-profit, or non-governmental organizations employ force of coercion to limit speech. Yet, what do we see daily, government and business organizations stealing liberty through limiting speech.

Consider the recent actions of GoFundMe, stealing funds collected for one group and trying to disburse them to other more “accepted” charities. What was the group being stolen from; the Freedom Convey in Ottawa. Who is being stole from; small people trying to do everything they can do support an end to government mandates. Who forced GoFundMe to steal; nobody! Sure, there was political pressure by politicians, but there was no law broken. Yet, theft was planned and executed until sufficient opposing pressure was applied.

Stealing money donated is denying a voice to the donors who willingly gave money to a cause. Where else do we see speech being limited, social media; especially, LinkedIn and Facebook, with Twitter a close third and competing heavily. Daily on LinkedIn people report being put into social media jail for sharing information, making comments, and trying to learn about topics the social media companies find “objectionable,” “misinformation,” or merely not politically acceptable to the company owners.

Since we hear the term so often, what is “misinformation?” According to Webster, misinformation is any information considered incorrect. What is being labeled as misinformation most commonly, how masks are ineffective against viral diseases. Recently I read the back of a box of N95 (Chinese KN95) masks (effective filtration to filter haze and dust), the manufacturer claims the mask is not effective against viruses. But, if you share this information online, it is considered “misinformation.” Thus, either the manufacturer is providing misinformation by manufacturing masks that cannot stop a virus, or those forcing mask mandates are passing misinformation.

Misinformation continues to be “the topic” for controlling information. Why does information need controlled? Consider the vitamin industry, tons of information are available, not all of the information has been approved by government agencies and bureaucrats, but the vitamin industry continues to make money and people benefit from taking vitamins. Yet, according to the website Psychology Today quotes the Surgeon General on the following:

“Information requires processes for representing, collecting, storing, retrieving, evaluating, transforming, sending, and receiving.”

People supporting this opinion are hell bent on stealing freedom and removing freedom from other people. Information does not need a process for representation, unless someone has something to hide or a devious purpose in conveying the information. The Surgeon General report goes on to relate the following as the definition of misinformation:

“Information that is false, inaccurate, or misleading according to the best available evidence at the time.”

For example, returning to the mask mandates. The manufacturer by law, according to Federal Regulations on labeling, must report what their masks can and cannot do. Yet, if you publish the manufacturer’s label on social media, you can have your social media accounts suspended for publishing misinformation, but who decides what is and is not misinformation?

Who enforces something as “misinformation?” No one should, but too many bureaucrats think they can limit speech and no elected official is stepping up to put the bureaucrats out of the freedom limiting business. Thus, we must ask ourselves, why aren’t elected officials stepping up to protect the citizens, because they do not deserve to be elected officials. Do you think this is too tough; I do not! When the elected officials refuse to do their jobs and protect the citizen from the liberty theft from bureaucrats, then it is time for new elected officials and smaller government!

Who granted Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter authority and power as the police of misinformation? The politicians did, by default and political power, by refusing to stand up for liberty, freedom, and the US Constitution they are duty sworn to uphold, has opened the abuse of the electorate. Consider the following statement from the Surgeon General:

“I am urging all Americans to help slow the spread of health misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Health misinformation is a serious threat to public health. It can cause confusion, sow mistrust, harm people’s health, and undermine public health efforts. Limiting the spread of health misinformation is a moral and civic imperative that will require a whole-of-society effort.”

Getting back to vitamins, the government makes claims, the vitamin manufacturers make claims, and the public is left the freedom and liberty to decide for themselves. Why is COVID-19 any different? Here is another pandemic, polio.

My wife, as a pre-teen (late 1940s early 1950s) contracted polio in Geneva, Ohio along with 14 or 15 classmates. My mother-in-law refused the doctor’s diagnosis claiming my wife would have to live in an iron lung and remain handicapped for the rest of her life. My mother-in-law went out, researched some treatments some Nuns in India/Asia were using to treat polio patients, and went to work convincing other parents and practicing the treatments on her sick daughter. Of the children who listened to my mother-in-law, every single one has led a productive life, did not have their leg muscles split, did not live in an iron lung, and have survived polio. One parent listened and followed the doctor’s advice, and the health policies of the county, that child had her leg muscles split, lived in an iron lung, and died early.

Polio has a significantly higher lethality rate than COVID-19 (50% vs. .01%), yet if a person does not listen and adhere to a doctor’s and bureaucrats every word as gospel for COVID, then that person is automatically considered bad, rebelling, and if they communicate online, they spread misinformation. Yet, the best doctors know they do not know everything and will admit this openly. Why should bureaucrats and scientists be given a free pass to say whatever they concoct, while everyone else is told to stop spreading misinformation? By the way, masks are ineffective against Polio as well.

Is the problem more apparent? Is the principle clear? When speech can be selected as a winner or loser using the authoritative power of the government, then those selecting what speech is allowed or not are committing an illegal action. It is 100% unconstitutional to regulate speech! Regardless of online, in person, by letter, etc. it is illegal and unethical no matter how the regulations are wrapped in empathetic language.

Review again the mandate for controlling language from the Surgeon General. Trading information on vitamins is health information and nobody is trying to restrict vitamins, but the Federal Government who wants more people to use pills from Big Pharmaceutical companies than natural remedies. Slowly but surely discussing vitamins have had to onboard more and more disclaimers, but still the discussion continues. America has reached a critical point, do we lay down our rights, liberties, and freedoms, or do we stand up and demand the government cease?

I choose to stand! Join me?

Shadowbanned – How Big Tech Ruins Lives!

Frankly, I am madder than a wet hen with a raging case of hemorrhoids! I can neither prove sufficiently that I have been shadowbanned nor conclusively that I have not been shadowbanned. What I can confirm is that simple Google searches for my content from non-affiliated computers continues to be on the third and fourth pages of a Google search, I cannot even pay to gain exposure for my dissertation to gather participants, and even for a magazine I write regularly for, who use Google Algothrims to power their search results, I am challenging to find.

I openly admit, I think for myself and refuse to follow the crowd just because the lemmings are throwing themselves off the cliff or because the rest of the sheep are following the Judas Goat to get their collective throats slit! Not only do I openly admit this, I encourage everyone around me to follow suit. Never will I tell anyone how to think, feel, or act; I believe in allowing you the privilege of doing what you will, considering what you will, and acting according to the dictates of your conscience!

How much have I spent trying to find a call center or two that will allow me to petition their employees to participate in my research project; more than $500 on direct advertising costs alone, more than $20K on the cost of the doctoral program, more than $3K on books and other materials, and this does not include time and other resources, equipment, Internet connectivity, and more. All because I fully believe that my dissertation research will help change business, improve training, and empower people to agentic action. Yet, the only respondents I have obtained for my dissertation research are idiots, trolls, and dweebs — people I would not invite into my home, ever.

Long-time readers know the three rules I live by; I repeat myself only for emphasis. From John Wayne’s “The Shootist,” we find the rules!

1. 1. I won’t be wronged!
  2. I won’t be insulted!
  3. I won’t be laid a hand on!
  4. I don’t do these things to other people, and I require the same from them!

When I pay good money, I expect results, not excuses, not spineless drivel, trolls, snowflakes, and dweebs to waste my time! More to the point, I require value. Yes, this is a simple principle; value for my money is based upon what I see as results; not what another will claim is “valuable.”

On top of the problems in finding participants and potentially being shadowbanned, I have found my money paying for things, not of value. For example, as a government employee, I paid labor union dues; guess what, no value there! I pay taxes every year, including social security, medicare, and other expenses; no value there! I pay more money today than I have ever done in the past due to inflationary taxes, courtesy of people in government who refuse to pay attention to sound fiscal policy; no value there!

Hence, to find myself wasting precious money and there is even a smidgen of corruption from Big Tech and shadowbanning, my anger gage gets pegged out, and I am looking to remedy the situation with less talk and more action!

Having researched the process of shadowbanning, the problems experienced since I went toe-to-toe with GOPUSA.com, and the continuing issues of gaining traction in social media, I can only say; enough is enough! I am through with politicians and their politically motivated pandemic, the festering sewer that is the media, and the ineptitude and expense of the government! I am done being told how to “protect my health” by weenies in government who are getting rich on my tax money and “incentives.” I am through being told to cut back, use less, and recycle more when those telling me this are wasting my time, resources, and patience!

I leave my invitation, join me! It is time, and past time, for those who consider themselves in power to fear those who have been betrayed, who pay for their “privileges,” and who then get shafted by special interest groups and deadbeat “leaders.” I refuse to allow my life to be further ruined by anyone. My mistakes are my business; I do not need or want help. I want to get on with my life without having to consider if some tech company is going to give me grief and problems because I think independently, act independently, and encourage independence in others!

© Copyright 2021 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images. Quoted materials remain the property of the original author.

Circling Back: Going the Extra Mile in Customer Service

It is no secret; I am a doctoral candidate. On Facebook, I advertised my dissertation to find participants to engage in my dissertation data collection. My dissertation is all about the role of the trainer in call center training. I am looking to answer some specific questions about what a trainer does, their role in training, and flush out details about the role of the call center trainer in establishing genetic memory. My first ad on Facebook, believe it or not, received more direct respondents than my second or third attempts. That the respondents accused me of being fake, a troll, and committing several bodily functions on their timelines bothered me greatly.

When mentioned to representatives from Facebook, who could see the comments and the original ad, the representatives reflected less care than I would have ever imagined. Yet, Facebook claims to be “customer-centric,” “customer-driven,” and “customer-obsessed.” LinkedIn, AT&T, Sprint/T-Mobile, Bank of America, Navy Federal Credit Union, and many other companies make similar claims and act similarly, where the professed policies are disconnected from reality, and the only person who suffers is oddly the customer. Then, the agents representing these companies are then asked to “go the extra mile for the customer.”

When going the extra mile was first addressed, leadership, training, business processes, and organizational communication all were aspects to the foundation to helping an agent “go the extra mile.” More needs to be discussed on “going the extra mile” and delivering upon the promises made by leadership. However, the discussion is useless unless followed swiftly by concerted action; thus, this article asks for and directly inspires action.

Compounded Leadership Failure

Let’s begin with reality and address the 300# gorilla. To the leaders of companies, customers are listening, and they are not stupid! Whether you believe this or not, your customers do, and they do not like what they see. AT&T, LinkedIn, and Facebook regularly inundate me with the voice of the customer surveys, new products, performance surveys, surveys, surveys, surveys. These are not the only companies demanding answers and resources from customers, but these companies are especially egregious at this practice. Tell me, why does nothing ever change in customer approach, customer service, customer care, and the voice-of-the-customer always appears to fall on deaf ears?

Leadership never collects qualitative and quantitative data and then uses this information to make change, drive visible customer affecting policy shifts, or even act like the customer is worthy of being listened to. How do we, the customers know we are not being heard; the agents do not have the ability to affect change. I called Xfinity/Comcast; I have an issue, I get nowhere with the agents, but I am still expected and offered multiple times the voice-of-the-customer survey to help improve customer relations. I invest my time in completing the survey; I even indicate a return call to discuss the scores is acceptable, only later do I discover that the voice-of-the-customer data is never worked, customers are not called, and the company does not care.

If you are sending a survey out, you need to address the survey results. Publicly with your agents, transparently with your shareholders and investors, and clearly and openly with your customers. By refusing to do these things, the leadership failures in demanding customer resources to complete surveys are wasted, compounded, and the customer is listening! Worse, the customer is sharing this information with other customers and is openly looking for options to replace you and your company! By publicly claiming “customer-obsession,” “customer-centricity,” and “customer-first” propaganda (e.g., marketing promises), you are making a commitment. Failure to honor that commitment delivers a “Used Car Sales” pitch, and lawyers and politicians become more trustworthy than you and your company. Customers are tired of “Lemons” when paying for cherries; is this clear enough?

Who is your first customer?

To every person claiming the first customer is a service or product purchaser, you are WRONG! Your first customer is your employees. Yet, employee abuse remains central to employee churn. Asking your employees to “go the extra mile” for an external customer and not seeing the business first go the extra mile for them is disheartening at best to your employees.

I am intimately familiar with a well-known company, its operations, and its customer commitment. The company does an excellent job in employee relations, which leads to year-over-year success with external customers. But the company has some deep-seated problems they are working on, and because they are honestly working on these issues, I am willing to give them anonymity for their efforts. One of the most fundamental issues this company has is in product delivery; the operations in the warehouse prioritize outbound (customer shipping of products ordered) to the exclusion of quality. The products are more important than the people, which is a growing pain for this company.

By forgetting that the first customer is the employees, this group churns at phenomenal rates compared to other business units. Why? Because of the insanity of being left out of customer service. Company benefits, time-off, vacation policies, “swag,” free merchandise, etc., none of this compensates for irrational operations that fundamentally treat the employee poorly and in a confused manner. If your company is “customer-focused,” then employees are top priority, and in making them top priority, they look after your external customers more efficiently, more expertly, and they will build a fatter bottom-line through “going the extra mile.”

When was the last time your employees were honestly engaged in voice-of-the-customer surveys and results? When was the last time the employees knew they were the top priority in your business? When was the last time operational policies and procedures were adjusted to remove confusion about employee worth and value? Tell me, are your shareholders and investors treated better than your number one investor, your employees? If so, your shareholders should be raking the current leadership over the coals for robbery and theft. Reduced bottom lines because of employee treatment should be a significant issue of discussion by the shareholders and investors, for this is nothing short of robbery. You are compounding another leadership failure through employee abuse, which increases costs and lowers bottom-line performance, e.g., robbing the investor and shareholder because you have refused to provide your first customer simple customer recognition, let alone service.

Going the Extra Mile

Before a supervisor, team leader, director, or other leaders in your business organization asks for an employee to “go the extra mile,” rate that leader on this question, “Have they already walked two miles with the employee?” If not, that person is asking for the impossible. No extra efforts can or ought to be sought when leadership fails to first show and do what it takes to walk two miles with an employee.

Want to know a secret? When the leader first walks two miles with the employee, that leader never has to ask anyone to “go the extra mile,” EVER! Your best leaders, your followers, are the people who, instead of looking forward first, make it a priority to look sideways. These leaders are experts at lifting the talent needed to look forward to a higher level. Looking sideways includes value-added training programs, professional paths to progression, recognizing and praising efforts honestly and frequently, delegating assignments and tasks, and being actively engaged in delivering “customer-centricity” to the employees. As a supervisor, team lead, director, etc., your first customer is those who follow you; what have you done lately to prove customer obsession to them?

By the way, your first customer is listening, awake, and actively engaged in either growing or leaving, all based upon how you treat your first customer. I suggest taking heed of them.

If you want to be part of my dissertation research, please reach out to me using the following email address: msalisbury1@my.gcu.edu. Please help me help you and your company through value-added research.

© Copyright 2021 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the photos or images used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images. Quoted materials remain the property of the original author.

Houston; We Have A Problem! – The Texas Complaint!

COMPLAINT REGISTERED AGAINST:
Practitioners Name: Dr. Aamr Herekar M.D

PERSON REGISTERING COMPLAINT:
First Name: Michael David “Dave”
Last Name: Salisbury

DETAILS OF COMPLAINT:
I possess a note from my doctor, a VA Primary Care Provider, written to my employer on VA Letterhead with a wet signature, declaring my inability to wear a mask. Advanced Neurology Epilepsy & Sleep Center (ANESC), Dr. Aamr A. Herekar M.D., and the office staff were presented with the same letter and hassled me before both appointments for not wearing a mask. At the second appointment, the commando secretary became hostile, argumentative, and a nuisance over the mask issue, even after I complied with putting on a face shield. If, as a provider, you reserve the right to refuse service, why did you agree to see me in the first place? This simple question is a mark of the deplorably low and execrable service I received in this office!

Over Facebook Messenger (23 September 2021), I was informed that I would be invited to find a different provider “due to my refusal to wear a mask.” Except, I never refused to wear a mask, I physically CANNOT safely wear a mask for health reasons. I have several breathing problems that begin with asthma, low-lung volume, and rigid T-Spine from a spinal injury sustained in US Navy service. I suffer from chronic pain and a musculoskeletal-neurological issue in my chest that does not allow me to breathe with enough force and volume to safely wear a mask! Even a face shield causes me breathing problems; CPAPs, cause me breathing problems; surgical masks cause me breathing problems. I reiterate and repeat, only for emphasis, I have NEVER refused to wear a mask, I have NEVER refused to wear a face shield as an alternative; provide me an alternative, I will comply. Act all huffy, put on attitudes, get hostile, rude, argumentative, and I will ask to leave and not return. Just validate my fuel chit so I can be reimbursed for my wasted time and fuel, which Dr. Herekar’s office was singularly inept at doing!

Yet, imagine that; Facebook Messenger has become the medium of choice for ending a patient relationship with a medical provider. How very inappropriate! How very unprofessional! Wait. Does Dr. Herekar have alternative methods of technology available to him to communicate with patients? Does he know how to use these other channels of communication? Yes, he does, and I cover these further down! When did Facebook Messenger become the channel of choice allowed by the State of Texas to end patient relationships with providers officially? Seriously?!?! Using social media to make claims that I harassed, swore, threatened, and sexually propositioned an office staff member. These are crimes; yet, the Dr. can think of no other means or methods of expressing the end of a patient relationship except to use Facebook Messenger; tell me, is this professional practice in the State of Texas? If I did not have access or a Facebook account, would he have hired an airplane and used sky-writing to alert me the doctor-patient relationship had concluded? Prior to this notification, I had spent two-solid weeks trying to call, leaving phone messages that were never returned, text messaging and not receiving a response, and emailing to no avail. Yet, the doctor decides the only channel to employ to return communication is Facebook Messenger. Do you see a problem with his conduct here? As an Industrial and Organizational Psychologist with more than 20-years in the trade, I certainly see several ethical breaches and operations problems here!

30 August 2021: I enter Dr. Herekar’s office and am confronted by a hostile office person, a commando secretary. Who knows I have a breathing problem and cannot wear a mask, who was presented the VA letter on my first appointment, and I did not have to wear a face shield to be seen. Important to note, no further contingencies were mandated for my next or any future appointments. Who proceeds to invent a reason to deny me care. She calls a supervisor, then “politely” (in a rude, condescending, and hostile manner) invites me to a back room to try and tell me off. She then walked out when I suggested she had two options, move my care to another neurologist or have me wear a face shield, and I was leaning towards option 1. I had no patience for the commando secretary who was inventing reasons to deny me care after having already been almost run over by traffic and being in the middle of a bad pain/nerve day.

Let me digress for a moment; I am hypersensitive to ALL touch. Nobody touches me, and I shy away from anyone trying to touch me. The commando secretary or Dr. Herekar invent that I swore, was rude, threatening, and propositioned the commando secretary to sit on my lap! All of which is a gross and fallacious LIE of the blackest hue! Then to use social media to discharge me from his clinic like I was the one committing some type of crime takes unprofessional conduct to a new level of abhorrent and repugnant low! I twitch 24/7/365, I suffer from neurological spasms, my chronic pain levels continue to be in 10’s and regularly climb to levels beyond. Now, one final piece of private information, I am married, and I have never even propositioned MY WIFE to sit on my lap, why in the name of all that is holy and pure would I proposition a complete stranger in a doctor’s office to do something I would not ask my wife to do as it would cause me excruciating pain?

Let me address why it has taken me so long to file a complaint. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) set up this doctor-patient relationship, I needed to allow the VA the opportunity to handle the problem. As they have referred me to you, and pulled a Cesear. I now have free reign to discuss this odious and abominable incident with what I sincerely hope is an avenue where other patients can be protected from a cherry-picking doctor. From the first minute Dr. Herekar entered the room, it was clear that I was not the type of patient Dr. Herekar wanted to see. He immediately began trying to push me back to psychology, “fix” with pharmaceuticals, and rush me out of his office. Due to the glacial speed of the VA, I will be obtaining more information about my neurological problems from a VA-provided neurologist in November. However, this incident with Facebook Messenger needs to be clarified to me the patient as to whether Dr. Herekar’s actions in ending the doctor-patient relationship were of the highest ethical and moral standards according to Texas. Then someone needs to investigate why my good name is being slandered and defamed, having these fallacious and execrable accusations created. Just because I am a disabled veteran who cannot (not will not, CANNOT) wear a mask, does not mean medical providers can create from whole cloth excuses and falsify medical records! As it says in the country song, “Houston, We have a problem!”

Remote Signature: 73.242.128.97

In the name of transparency, the above document, with some slight alterations to hide addresses and phone numbers, is what was submitted today (27 Oct 2021) to the State of Texas Medical Liscensure Board as a complaint! When I figure out the New Mexico pathways, I have two additional complaints to file.

I am sick to death of medical providers falsifying records to hide incompetence, discriminate against those who cannot wear masks, and have the ethical behavior of pigs in the mire. Enough is enough; I will not take this disrespect anymore! Vaccination status is nobody’s business and mask or no mask should not dictate social acceptance.

COVID should not be the reason that America dies!

© Copyright 2021 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images.

NO MORE BS: Outlining the Problems – Candidate to Elected Official

Recently, an email purportedly written or approved by Warren Buffett came through my email inbox. The email has me thinking about the perks and problems in elections, allowing politicians of all levels of government to act like “Lords and Masters” over other citizens. Agree or disagree, your call; however, I do passionately believe that America needs better politicians, and the following are my thoughts on obtaining better politicians.

1. Better politicians begin with better candidates. The corporate media has proven how inadequate and biased they are in reporting upon candidates, vetting candidates, and sharing candidate information. Thus, the first step in improving better candidates is better reporting of information. Not just websites, not just Twitter feeds, not just the speeches, the candidate needs to be vetted, but games of gotcha and 20-year-old mistakes should not kill a candidate. However, if a pattern of behavior stretches 20-years, that should be reported and discussed as part of the morals and ethics of a candidate.
  - - - Being a politician should never be a popularity contest as portrayed in Hollywood.
      - Morals, ethics, and living one’s beliefs need to be witnessed long before a candidate becomes a candidate!
      - Stop the emotional game playing. Sexism is stupid, racism is wrong, and playing either card makes you, the player, appear imbecilic, and you have lost my vote forever!
2. Vetting a candidate should not include a test; however, the candidate should be able to answer basic questions about constitutionality, the US Bill of Rights, a citizen’s role in government, and have a working knowledge of history. Practice in public speaking is helpful but not mandatory.
3. A candidate should not be elected for life! While I am not fully supportive of mandatory term limits, I am a full supporter of impeaching and replacing any politician for failure to follow the law! Then the ex-politician becomes a defendant in a court of law, by a jury of their peers, for crimes committed. Why can’t a mayor, a member of the US House or Senate be recalled and fired? Let’s make this process easier and running for office less expensive.

Let us Talk Term Limits.

Agency and freedom, liberty, and capability are interconnected principles needed for a Republic to select its politicians. Term limits unfairly reduce all these interconnected principles, and while I believe in the “Rule of Law,” the framers had good reason not to include term limits. Please note, I am not advocating for a permanent ruling class, nor am I arguing for career politicians; I urge people to think beyond the current disastrous crop of politicians and how they got there. Living in a Republic means change requires time, a lot of time, and sometimes the best politicians need more time but do not have that time due to term limits, so they rush, and in rushing, what could have been a good thing, becomes a disaster!

Indiana is an excellent example of the need for time. Through 10-years of fiscal sanity, the government has been able to accrue $2 Billion that can now be used to aid a lot of people. But, these funds were not available without a decade of sacrifice. But, this does not mean the governments can go from fiscal sanity and sacrifice to spend crazy!

Thus, bringing us back to the need for better candidates for elections, and a need for better vetting, lower election costs, and keeping an informed electorate firmly in control over the politician elected to lead. Does anyone remember when President Clinton faced impeachment in the Senate for lying; he was genuinely scared of being defeated and kicked out of office. Yet, the governor of California, when facing an impeachment, laughed. That is where politics have fallen since, and because of President Clinton and his vile blaggard of a spouse! Why was President Clinton successful in winning the impeachment process. For two reasons, his wife is an expert in backroom dealing, bribery, and sycophancy, and the Republican Party fell apart without a clear successor that would have been superior to President Clinton.

1. I agree; there IS too much bloody money in politics, especially for candidates. As a candidate, the need for money leads to promises, deals, and Quid Pro Quo like no other business. In fact, if businesses operated as candidates for political office, their owners would be arrested and jailed! But the answer to the problem, like in business, does not require more laws, lawyers, and government, but less! How many election commissions does it require for a candidate to apply for political office; too bloody many! This means that the legal process to become a candidate is too expensive, long before the first dollars are ever raised. The laws governing a candidate for public office have become so convoluted that it makes the election commissions the Praetorian Guard, instead of what they are, flaccid, impotent, bureaucrats with too much time, too many connections, and too much politics to survive much longer! Do not forget the IRS plays a significant role in the candidate becoming a politician, debt, banks, and other lending institutions (e.g., the mafia, drug manufacturers including illegal and illicit, big business, etc.) all become the “silent partners” in a politician’s life.

Ask yourself how did the fraudulent president win, the counters and election commissions who govern them. Worse, the legislative and executive branches of the state, city, and county government stood by and allowed, cheered, and promoted the fraud to occur. Leading to a question; is it possible for any post-2020 election on any level of government to be trusted? How much money did President Trump have to fork over to election commissions to have a day in court, to freaking much, and even then, too often, all he got was an election commission, not a judge and jury.

1. Corporate Media and Debates. My entire life, I have debated. As a kid, I learned the rules of debate, and some of those debates ended in fights. Some won, some lost, but I learned. In high school, I learned public speaking, debate, and parliamentary procedures. It did not stop me from wanting to knock a bloke’s block off his shoulders, but I learned how to win using words and ideas! I still think some arguments should be settled with a duel, not guns, not swords, but quarterstaffs, public forum, and you fight out the problem. How many current snowflakes in office would quickly retire if the opportunity to fight it out was still allowed?

I have yet to see a “debate” during an election; by the way, neither have you! I have seen manufactured plastic candidates, witnessed corporate media play gotcha, and I observed weak-kneed spineless people talk, but never a debate! A debate includes ideas, not emotion, logic, and reason, not hyperbole and media controllers. A debate does not include commercials! Nor does a debate include 26 or more people on a stage answering questions and interrupting each other for “points.” After a debate, I do not need a talking head “explaining” anything, which is why debates in public used to mean something in politics. A debate should never include more than three people at any one time on a debate platform, and the media are not “asking questions or arbiters of rules, nor are there stopwatches and timed speeches. A debate begins with ideas, ends with logic, and there is no place for the media to interrupt. Pick a topic, detail your ideas, and allow the public to decide.

In conclusion, I have some questions for consideration. I hope to take these questions and form future articles, but before those arrive, I want to spur conversation, and I hope to get mental juices flowing while considering these five fundamental points.

- - Why isn’t a politician’s pay commiserate with and a ratio of the debt the government owes? For example, get a tax and spend politician in office; they have no incentive not to spend. But, if their pay is reduced by XX Amount for every thousand dollars in government debt, how would that politician be willing to spend taxpayer dollars? How would many political appointees be spending if every dollar costs the boss? How many political appointees would survive the smell test for fiscal sanity?
  - America is a Republic (If we can keep it), why do politicians have retirement packages? Why do they have medical, dental, vision, and other benefits after leaving office? What would happen if these citizens had to live the laws they created? Remember ObamaCare and the fit threw when the politicians were “encouraged” to have the same plans for medical, dental, and vision as ObamaCare citizens were forced to acquire?
  - Why are politicians excused from paying Social Security and the other federal and state pay deductions that every other citizen has to pay out of every paycheck? Live and work in DC, but represent a state elsewhere; you should be paying a lot more in taxes, but you have excused and loopholed your paycheck. Not allowed, and I think those paycheck debts should be backdated and paid. Imagine how much Speaker Pelosi would owe in back taxes… No mercy, you cut yourself out, now pay up!

Let me reiterate, America is a Republic (if we can keep it)! A Liberty FIRST Culture knows and understands political accountability and responsibility is crucial to maintaining a free republic. Better candidates are needed to improve those who win political office. I do not know about you, but I am through with coddling the current politicians across America. They need to act for the best of all America or leave office and be held accountable! There is no third option!

NO MORE BS: Hypocrites, Liars, and Thieves Edition

The pattern left to the reader in the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is one of foremost importance to what we are witnessing in democratically governed societies the world over. If ever a time was presented when the people need to know and then act, that time is now. I intend to start the conversation on liars, thieves, and hypocrites with clarity, example and offer for your consideration patterns that spot the deceit. Once deceit is spotted, it is as glaring as a bloodstain on a white satin dress. You cannot look past that mark!

What is a Hypocrite?

Hypocrites are those who wear masks of decency and outward morality, but live lives of deception, believing that, like Dr. Jekyll, they can live a double life and never be discovered. From James’s New Testament writings, we find that “A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways” (James 1:8). According to Webster, a hypocrite is one who practices hypocrisy. According to Webster, those who practice hypocrisy are living, “the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.” To Nathaniel Hawthorne goes the last word on hypocrites, “No man (person) for any considerable period can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the true.”

What is a Liar?

According to Webster, a liar is a person who tells lies. Lying is defined by Webster as, “an intentionally false statement.” Is the distinction clear; the liar knows the truth and intentionally misleads the audience, always for personal gain. From William Shenstone, we find an eternal truth, “A liar begins with making falsehoods appear like truth, and ends with making truth itself appear like a falsehood.” The pattern detailed by William Shenstone is precise and speaks to one of the most deceitful practices of all, making truth appear as a falsehood to sell a bunch of lies. As a kid, I was often told that the devil will tell you one truth to help you believe a thousand lies.

What is a thief?

According to Webster, a thief is “a person who steals, especially secretly or without open force; one guilty of theft or larceny.” During my undergraduate degree program, another student would regularly plagiarize my weekly posts as their own work, then had the temerity to try and claim I was plagiarizing them. I had a habit of posting the weekly posts the first day of the new week, the timestamps on my posts proved my work was mine, and the student eventually disappeared from my cohort. Plagiarism is a fancy word for intellectual property theft. Plagiarism used to get politicians kicked out of politics, except the current Commander in Chief is a well-known plagiarizer. He is being honored with keeping his job and getting promoted beyond his maximum level of incompetence. The fraudulent president, Biden’s first act in office, was to plagiarize President Trump on COVID response, vaccine response and belittled President Trump for doing the right thing.

Why is this important?

The story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde speaks volumes on issues being combatted right now. Dr. Jekyll had conquered himself; his person was morally upright, had integrity, and had a worthy reputation. But, then drugs came along, and the drugs made Mr. Hyde, who was evil incarnate. Eventually, the drugs would no longer bring back Dr. Jekyll, and Mr. Hyde conquered, and Dr. Jekyll was destroyed.

All my life, I have been told, “Honorable people do not get into politics, and politicians never work at honest labor.” Yet, I cannot help but ask, “Why are people who lie, thieve, and practice hypocrisy allowed to represent anyone?” It was 1987-1988, while watching the presidential race get whittled down to Bush I and Dukakis, I heard Jesse Jackson and Al Gore one night talking, and thought I would not invite these people into my home, why are they allowed to run for president? Over time this thought has returned, in one election between two particularly vile election choices (Obama and Romney) I was told to “Hold my nose, lift my skirts, and vote for Romney as the ‘lesser of two evils.” I am happy to report, I voted for Donald Duck!

I will not give my permission to represent me, e.g., my vote, to someone I would never invite into my home as a guest. I have had to learn to research candidates, research issues, use critical thinking, and even then, make mistakes. Yet, I know that when we, the electorate, stand together and refuse the thieves, liars, and hypocrites a political office, we are better as a nation, a state, a county, a city, and a community.

Examples:

New York City Mayor De Blasio ordered COVID, infected patients, into long-term care facilities (nursing homes). The numbers are finally coming to light that 13,197 additional COVID patients were created, where 4080 died! The mayor has refused responsibility for these deaths, pain, suffering, and increased medical costs. The mayor of New York City has consistently lied throughout the COVID/Government Panic; people have died, resources wasted, and the person most responsible refuses accountability. Thus showing Mayor De Blasio is a liar, a thief, and a hypocrite!

Big Tech, for several years now, has been actively engaged in intentionally misleading consumers. When Facebook’s thought police remove data that asks honest questions as misleading, the consumer is being lied to. When LinkedIn edits posts arbitrarily and refuses First Amendment rights to everyone, all consumers using LinkedIn are being stolen from, lied to, and LinkedIn proves it is a hypocrite. Due to political leanings, Twitter illegally suppressing First Amendment rights to President Trump over a trumped-up charge is lying, stealing, and acting as a hypocrite!

November 2009, the Climate Research Unit became “Climategate,” ripped the scab off the festering wounds called Climate Change. The emails released showed how statistics were employed to lie, cheat, steal, and then the hypocritical scientists claimed that their lies were truth. Except, a lie cannot be a truth, and making a truth appear as a lie, does not change the lie into a truth. By gaming the peer-review process, climate science lies have been peddled, and politicians have gotten rich off climate lies and climate lawfare. I am not claiming that humans could not be better stewards of resources. I am arguing that draconian government mandates are never the answer to changing behaviors of individuals.

The hinge upon which the lies, thieves, and hypocrites will eventually hang.

How does a person tell a liar from a truth-teller; the person’s intent. How do you know a person’s intent; observe them. Are their actions producing good results, or are they producing poisoned fruit and hurting others? Intent is a legal term, and the following is essential as we observe for consequences of actions, words, and results.

What are the 3 types of intent?

The three common-law intents ranked in order of culpability are malice aforethought, specific intent, and general intent. Malice aforethought is a special common-law intent designated for only one crime: murder. The definition of malice aforethought is “intent to kill.” Specific intent is the intent to bring about a particular result, do something other than the criminal act. General intent is simply the intent to perform the criminal action.

Consider the following, Bill Engvall tells a story of his little toddler boy walking over to the sleeping cat and kicking the cat. When questioned, the little boy claims, “It was an accident.” Yet, the keen observer watched him walk across the room and intentionally kick the cat. Last summer, Speaker Pelosi (D) deliberately refused, for political gain, to collaborate with other lawmakers and pass COVID Relief legislation. Essentially refusing to perform her most basic job as a Congressional Representative. Speaker Paul Ryan (R) intentionally refused to pass a budget, and the government was shutdown. Intentions are the actions we take, regardless of our words, that prove where our priorities are and how we think about our jobs.

Consider the following headline from NPR, “After Record 2020 Turnout, State Republicans Weigh Making it Harder to Vote.” The title itself is misleading, the article is very biased, and voting problems go deeper than the fraud and misfeasance witnessed in November 2020. The 2020 primaries were a disaster! The 2018 election cycle was a farrago. The 2016, 2014, 2012, 2010, 2008, 2006, 2004, 2002, 2000 elections cycles have steadily worsened in fraud, idiocy in counting, technological blunders, and intentional theft of elections. Hence, NPR’s intent is to employ smoke screens and mirrors to obfuscate and denigrate, lie, cheat, steal, and be hypocrites of the fact that the only people who receive help from poorly performed election processes are Democrats! As a media channel, NPR’s job is to keep people confused so the charade of elections can continue. They are proving intent to harm and be hypocritical.

How does a person fight back?

Learn the candidates, look past the makeup, the façade, and the media representations.
Ask tougher questions. In order to learn, we must ask questions and never be satisfied with answers.
When we teach others, we learn more perfectly. As we learn more perfectly, we are inspired to teach more.
- Who do we teach, ourselves, our families, discussions with friends, and writing down your thoughts on a blog are all good and useful methods for teaching, to power better learning.
Start locally, clean up local politics first. Thus, get involved with the city council, the mayor, the county board, the school board. Demand to be heard.
Support good people around you, support the efforts to learn, support your neighbors as they begin to explore that which is familiar to you.
Stop allowing the media and politicians to separate, classify, divide, and name. I am an American! That title is sufficient!

American – A(h) Me I Can!

LinkedIn Jail – Shifting the Paradigms on Social Media Power

20 August 2019 marks the fifth day I have been in LinkedIn jail, where my account is being reviewed for having broken some mysterious rule. I verified my identity immediately upon recognizing my account was suspended, I have done nothing wrong, and yet here I sit waiting for some magical decision by someone in LinkedIn’s mass bureaucracy to allow me back into my account and professional network. In the sparse emails received from LinkedIn, I learned that I had been placed in LinkedIn jail because of hate speech; this is where the paradigms of social media need correction.

On 18 August 2019, I sent the following message:

“What specifically about this message is “Hate speech?” Nothing in the ambiguous policies declares what “Hate speech” is, no definition, no clear line of demarcation; yet, I am being singled out from all the other responses for “Hate speech.” Interesting peek into social media, LinkedIn specifically, snowflake melting syndrome. I am aghast to see this behavior leveled against me. Clearly define “Hate speech!”

I have asked for an explanation regarding how the above violates the user agreement, the posting policies, and the rules of LinkedIn, all to no avail. This comment was posted to a report regarding Representative Rashida Harbi Tlaib (D), and her continued flaunting of American Tax Law added to her hubris, individual ambition, and avarice, shown at every event. Except that some snowflake on LinkedIn has the power to place me in LinkedIn jail over a comment they disagree with politically.

The arbitrary actions by LinkedIn is a problem; people’s livelihoods are wrapped up in their LinkedIn profiles. I write articles and post them to LinkedIn on a myriad of topics to engage conversation and drive business to my consulting firm. I am not a 30,000-person networker on LinkedIn. My professional network includes many of those I have worked with professionally across the last two decades and 26-moves in the United States. I do accept invitations from veterans, unemployed people, and associates I meet who need a hand up. I employ my professional network to help others.

All of my articles, but especially the articles discussing politics, religion, the VA, and elected officials are carefully written, sourced, packaged to present ideas, solutions, and explain beyond a single post why something is the way it is. I have never had any problem in the almost two decades I have been a member of LinkedIn. I don’t Facebook as that entire platform is heavily biased against new ideas and changes in thinking. I do not Tweet on the Twitter platform as that platform remains useless, and the ties that bind and gag on Facebook are the same ties that bind and gag on Twitter. I have accounts on both but rarely use them. Hence, my social media is limited to LinkedIn, and now I am left to wonder if maybe I should be changing this as well.

Where is the appeals board for the decision to close access to my business and my personal LinkedIn accounts? Who has the authority to close access? Why does this person have this access? Why can a single snowflake melting be the reason any social media account is placed into access limbo? All these questions and more the elected officials should have been asking in the committee meetings on social media, yet the items were never addressed; why? Where are the warnings and the opportunity to discuss differences in opinion between LinkedIn and the user?

I have heard discussed on LinkedIn multiple times regarding how too many LinkedIn accounts are fraudulent, or the owners are there to cause trouble; was the person reporting my comments as “hostile, hate speech” also investigated for veracity? If not, why? In more carefully reading the new LinkedIn User Agreement and the policies and rules documents, I have been amazed at the fake account language, and I would presume that both parties should be investigated when a claim of “hate speech” is reported. I would presume that LinkedIn is more interested in getting to the truth and ferreting out that trolls, the hacks, the criminals, and the dregs of society, rather than giving honest people a hard time. LinkedIn, what is the answer moving forward?

Here are five potential solutions:

Before shutting down access, send an alert to both users in disagreement, investigate both users for content and appropriate user agreement adherence, look at the content posted, the threads, and evaluate both on professional merit. Then communicate with both parties the decision. Your platform is neutral ground for expressions of personal opinion, and Freedom of Speech means the “yammer heads and trolls” get their say within reason. For example, the legal bounds of Free Speech as set forth by the Supreme Court.
Filter out the miscreants and fake accounts. I do not know how many times I have been attacked on various threads by an account that is there one day and gone the next. I was forced to submit my government-issued ID to prove I am a real person. When investigating accusations are both users required to verify through government-issued ID their reality? If not, why is this not standard practice to aid in eliminating erroneous accounts causing trouble?
Put into the user agreements clear, concise, and easily followed language regarding where the limits are in speech. I know, this should be obvious to professional adults. But, the necessity is evident due to the miscreants and malefactors currently residing on LinkedIn, who are abusing LinkedIn rules, regulations, and agreements for personal satisfaction.
No single person should have the power to harm another for personal gain. From the time something is reported to LinkedIn, to the time action on a user’s account is taken by LinkedIn there should be communication between both parties and a neutral party at LinkedIn discussing the accusation, proving the account is real and detailing what is happening. Specifying the penalties, how long any penalties will last, and how to appeal the decision. Barring this type of process, the abuse of LinkedIn will continue and harm LinkedIn, not the users.
Start holding false account owners responsible for the damage they do to LinkedIn’s brand. I have several accounts in my professional network that have proven to be false but only after engaging in business with the user. False accounts are very frustrating, wasting my time and resources, and doing damage to LinkedIn’s reputation. Why doesn’t the user creation process have a veracity checker using government-issued ID, biometrics, or some other technologically powered method to weed out the charlatans? What is LinkedIn doing to protect themselves from the hacks and trolls after an account is discovered to be false, or mass owned by a troll?

20 August 2019 – Before completing this article, an email was received, part of that message is copied below:

“We’ve reviewed your appeal. Based on the information you provided and if you agree to abide by LinkedIn’s Terms of Service: https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement, we’ll grant this appeal. You can agree to abide by our Terms of Service by replying to this email with your explicit consent.

Please note, that LinkedIn expects all members to behave in a professional manner when engaging on the platform. Should this account violate our terms in the future, we may restrict the account again. Any future violations of our Terms could result in a permanent restriction.

To learn more about what is and is not acceptable on LinkedIn, please review LinkedIn’s Professional Community Policies: https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/34593.”

I have responded. Since I have done nothing wrong, have never abused LinkedIn’s rules, regulations, and user agreement, and I do not plan to in the future, I remain appalled at my treatment by LinkedIn and will continue to search for a LinkedIn alternative. The lack of clarification, the lack of action, and the disgusting lack of reply to my questions are beyond the pale, and if LinkedIn does not change, I will. The power of social media to block, harm, and restrict without cause and justification must cease, and I do not care how much money George Soros pumps into social media to demand the social media platforms obeisance to his personal agenda.

To have the final word, the following was received announcing I have been released from LinkedIn Jail:

“However, please be advised that this is your final warning regarding abuses on the LinkedIn site. If your account is reported again after today’s date, your LinkedIn account will be subject to termination.”

LinkedIn has concluded that I did nothing wrong, but if another snowflake reports me, I will lose my LinkedIn professional network. They threaten me, but cannot answer simple questions, propose solutions that can protect me, or even engage in polite conversation.

America, social media’s pernicious, and self-inflated power over us must cease. LinkedIn, I will either find a new platform for professionals or will cease all contact on your platform.

Threatening me without cause and justification is the last straw!

The images used herein were obtained in the public domain, this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this:

Spread the word:

Like this: