Many distributors of an MLM will ask about my credentials. It sounds like a logical question on the face of it. However, upon further examination it really isn’t. I thought I’d break down a few of the reasons why so we can finally put this debate tactic out of commission.
What are the Credentials of the MLM inventors
I’ve looked at MonaVie and Protandim in detail. In the case of MonaVie, it was developed by Ralph Carson, who had and extremely questionable interview on CBS Radio. In it he violates the FTC guidelines when he talks about the “testimonials” of MonaVie.
Protandim’s inventor, Paul Myhill has no medical background at all.
Some People Ask Why they should Trust an Anonymous Person like Me
I would first like to address why I am anonymous. I have written more than 1300 posts about personal finance over at Lazy Man and Money dating back to 2006. It is quite common (as you tell from this article) for personal finance bloggers to blog anonymously as they mention details about their income and net worth that they might not want to attach to their name. It doesn’t make sense for me to leave my name with much of my financial information present in that blog, so that someone could use the information to steal my identity. Furthermore this allows me to be open and honest with readers about contract negotiations for a new job. If I wasn’t anonymous, the potential employer could “Google” my name, find my blog, steal my negotiating “play book.”
When I started blogging, I wasn’t introduced to the evil that exists in these MLM scams. While I am happy with the number of people who thank me for helping them understand that MonaVie is a scam, when a MonaVie distributor like Glenn Siesser threatens to kill me and another monavie distributor tries to blackmail me, it’s clear that remaining anonymous is the best course of action. From the comments on my original MonaVie post and my Protandim post it is quite clear that many of the distributors leaving comments are not logical, sensible people looking to engage in a productive debate. I’m trying to help consumers and I ask for nothing in return. I’d rather do my job without having to deal with a mentally imbalanced person overreacting about 35 cents worth juice (in the case of MonaVie) or 12 cents of commonly found supplements (in the case of Protandim). These companies don’t need that kind of lawsuit on their hands either as it would easily bankrupt them (and yes we know that MonaVie would be held responsible for the actions of their distributors, just like Napster was).
Why Would You Want Credentials Anyway?
I don’t make any medical claims, not do I claim to have any medical training. I only show you what unbiased information from reputable third parties and point out logical inferences that require no more than your typical 5th grade education to understand. I would never tell you to simply take my opinion for it – as a debate tactic it is an epic fail. Because of this, medical credentials are not necessary – just simple critical thinking skills.
The Purpose of Asking for Credentials in a Debate is Logical Fallacy
Asking for credentials is a classic Appeal to Accomplishment logical fallacy. In case you are too busy to click that link here’s what Wikipedia says:
“Appeal to accomplishment is a genetic fallacy wherein Person A challenges a thesis put forward by Person B which criticizes Person C (or A) a due to the fact that Person B has not accomplished similar feats or accomplished as many feats as Person C or Person A.
Rebutting this appeal has been popularly called ‘Ebert’s Law’, referring to Roger Ebert’s ability to critique films irrespective of his accomplishments as a filmmaker.”
The person asking for credentials is simply trying to debunk what I’ve proven with a logical fallacy. Since the debater can find no logical fault with the arguments I’ve made, the debater resorts to fallacies. (For those who don’t know what “fallacy” means dictionary.com’s defines it as “a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy.”)
Finally, while we are on the topic of fallacies about credentials, I should note Alexander Schauss and Appeals to Authority. This is exactly the same as Joe McCord’s Role at LifeVantage.
No related posts.