why "guru bashing" is so popular | warrior forum - the #1 ... - what kind of facial mask is good for oily skin
Jason Matthews asked in another thread: this is a good question.
I think it might be useful to discuss this issue.
This is my opinion.
It's not just happening in this industry.
If you can see the slander and slander between speakers in many fields, even the struggle between people in the self
You will realize that helping the industry. . .
However, in the field of Internet marketing, it is more notable than most other areas.
There are several reasons for this.
First of all, there are some reasons why it doesn't necessarily work.
Some people think that the visibility of the attack is because it's good --founded.
In fact, the person who was beaten should get it.
This is certainly true in some cases, but in my experience they are a very small minority.
Second, the fact that "many" people seem to jump on the same bashwagon seems to provide some basis for their claims.
I suggest you look at the evidence, not the number of people who say a word.
You will understand why these numbers are not important in a minute.
Third, the obvious compelling argument put forward by some people sounds really, really good.
The problem is that people often don't see enough background and facts to know if an argument is valid or just someone who is good at presenting an argument.
Now, why is this less obvious in other industries?
First of all, few people can think so quickly that they have the necessary skills and experience to challenge top experts.
Only fools will read 3 books on archaeology, believing that they are qualified to "debunk" the theory accepted by most people in the subject.
At the same time, it is also a tradition of maintaining personal privacy in many industries and research areas.
Then, the real experts discuss the Forum on their topic and the people who have read 3 books discuss the degree of separation between their forums.
There are everywhere.
You just can't see it because the players are too careful about their reputation.
A credible rebuttal to a theory is accepted.
Attacking someone as a liar requires more evidence to take it seriously.
It will make it faster for you to sue in other areas.
I know the fight between some of the world's very top offline marketing brands and you will never hear about it.
The same is true of some of the top people in this field.
They don't play the bashing game publicly, but it's not all sweet and bright for everyone in the business.
So why is it so obvious in this industry?
Why do you think there are always people there who criticize the "big dog?
Marketing is a "vague" form of art/science/black magic.
If something sounds good to you, then almost 100% of the certainty is that it sounds good to many others.
Secondly, many people confuse results with skills, experience and expertise.
I think it was Elmer hellstone who recently reminded me that some people think that the experience of the same year, repeated ten times, is qualified to be the experience of ten years.
People with the same experience, and repeat constantly in that year, tend to be the loudest when announcing their final knowledge of one thing.
Including when faced with someone who took 5 years to try and test and prove to do much more than the first person.
In addition to that, there is a great deal of information on the subject, and most of the people who consume it have little experience needed to properly assess the information.
They read a little and thought it made them an expert.
The low threshold to enter this area ensures that we will see a lot of people with very poor critical thinking skills.
Join "Lotto mentality ".
"Believe that they will make it rich and then painfully realize that it is not easy.
In the mind of hasty thinkers, this promotes the idea that those who are bigger are achieved by deception.
Hell, if the new guy makes less than $10,000 a year, the big dog must have lied to a lot of people and made $1,000,000 a week, right? Not.
But they believe.
It offers a comforting sanctuary that does not admit that they are just not doing the right thing.
If they can push judgment to someone else, they can escape self-judgment.
The competition factor is here.
A large number of people entering the industry think that the space at the top is limited, and every time someone else is dragged down, they feel that they have an advantage.
Some people play with people whose fantasies are shattered and some need to believe that others are bad so they don't have to believe that they just screw up.
Or quit too fast.
Or they don't get what they want for whatever reason.
These people attract their markets by desperately giving them what the market wants: external validation of their excuses.
There are mean and stingy people.
As in any field.
Some have unrealistic expectations and they believe that anyone who fails to meet them must have some evil or malicious basis for such failure.
Any area that involves making money will attract some desperate people.
The cost of entry is low, the perceived potential is great, great!
People enter from their heads, left and right.
Put all this on something that is clearly certain. . .
This is not a success.
This is a way of life for many of them.
They can only maintain it by the same rationalisation as other "failed" people --
Let people agree with you so you can keep the band
A little more assistance in your self.
Some people just don't understand things and say something wrong, purely out of lack of experience.
Many people think they are the market.
Their personal preferences represent the whole world, or at least the parts they deal.
And everyone thinks they are experts.
Now, add the elements that let all steam and hot air release: once hot air is released, there will usually be other people feeling the same frustration, hostility, confusion or any other incentive push involved, who will jump in with two feet.
Most people will not flinch once they take an open stand.
Some will let it go, some will escalate their statements, and some will develop fixes over the years.
But few people would look at the evidence and say, if applicable, "I was wrong.
"After all, they're experts, right?
The same people tend to participate in most of the bashing at any given time.
If 10,000 people are satisfied with the product and 30 people are not satisfied, then 15 of these 30 people are likely to participate in the attack on the product.
People who are satisfied with it usually don't flinch.
They may think that this person has one of the problems that just happened.
Or they have unrealistic expectations.
Or, they're just crazy, who wants to waste time with unreasonable people?
Positive people don't usually worry about negative people and vice versa.
So the negative voice, which has a greater stake in proving their case, bears the view of most people.
That's why you should never believe these words based on the number of people who say them.
That's why "bashing" is so common in this industry.
Anyway, that's what I think of it.
I believe some people will have other opinions.