The Pivot Point...

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
1

A thought has been coalescing in my mind and I would like to see how it develops as a topic on this forum.

Some of you know that I have spent a great part of my life in the automotive business. Much of this time has been spent managing dealerships and sales forces. While working with sales people one topic seemed to come up time and again, and that is the issue of control. Salesman expressed the frustration of loosing control of the customer and the sales process.

I struggled with finding a way to help them at first because I have never been an old school ground and pounder when it comes to selling. I believe in nurturing a win win that will benefit both parties. However, I do recognize that making such a big purchase is stressful and part of creating a healthy sales and buying environment is a professional to guide on through the process, resolve objections, provide focus and fullfil the customers needs with an appropriate vehicle. I eventually hit upon a basketball metaphor and the concept of the pivot point.

When beginning to work with a customer there needs to be a lot of free flow of information. Wants, needs, budgets, etc. must be elicited and addressed in an open matter. This is the part of the game that is like moving the ball down the court. There comes a time for action, however, and certain specific actions must be adhered to. Specifically, there comes a time when the player stops dribbling and takes the ball into his hands. At this point he establishes a pivot point, or anchor which controls or dictates his actions from that point forward.

In other words, once the pivot point is established focus is narrowed and you must work around this point and not travel. Here lies the tie in that seems relevant to me in PWI. The pivot point is staying on subject and not straying off topic or traveling.

I see too many great topics destroyed before they can be fully developed. Rarely, however, I see someone with an inherent ability to establish a pivot point and maintain it to the utter frustration and meltdown of an otherwise very good debater.

An example sure to rankle is the tie ups between Jay Pierce and smh23. SMH23 is a bright if left leaning young man with a gift for the written word. He does a pretty admirable job of staying civil and at least trying to maintain the appearance of objectivity. However, Jay Pierce can turn him into a shrill, foaming at the mouth mess at least part of the time. Part of this lies in the fact that smh23 thinks pierce is a right wing, redneck, conspiracy believing, Alabama nuckle dragger well below smh’s intelligence (he is not), but the true weapon that Pierce sees to weld almost unconsciously is the ability to establish the pivot and then lock down smh’s travel. A few rounds of this and smh23 begins cussing like a libtard and challenging Jay Pierce’s heritage while Pierces remains cool as a cucumber and drags him right back to the center.

Personalities aside, do you think this a fair assessment? Please share.

2

[quote]JEATON wrote:

Personalities aside, do you think this a fair assessment? Please share.

[/quote]

Absolutely.

Personalities included spot on!

3

[quote]JEATON wrote:

An example sure to rankle is the tie ups between Jay Pierce and smh23. SMH23 is a bright if left leaning young man with a gift for the written word. He does a pretty admirable job of staying civil and at least trying to maintain the appearance of objectivity. However, Jay Pierce can turn him into a shrill, foaming at the mouth mess at least part of the time. Part of this lies in the fact that smh23 thinks pierce is a right wing, redneck, conspiracy believing, Alabama nuckle dragger well below smh’s intelligence (he is not), but the true weapon that Pierce sees to weld almost unconsciously is the ability to establish the pivot and then lock down smh’s travel. A few rounds of this and smh23 begins cussing like a libtard and challenging Jay Pierce’s heritage while Pierces remains cool as a cucumber and drags him right back to the center.

[/quote]

I’m flattered to have been worthy of my own strange, oblique diatribe, but this is essentially a giant call-out over two threads: one in which the poster in question showed himself to be a Sandy Hook “truther” [and I’m hardly the only person around here who thinks he’s an idiot for that] and another in which it was averred that “there is no room for uncertainty in a court of law”–whatever the hell that means [it was a half-implication that jurors do not err, which is utter nonsense]. All of this from the guy who A) accused a bunch of T-Nation posters of conspiring to suppress his speech with COINTELPRO tactics and B) posted a link to a list of these tactics [i]that came from a UFO/alien contact conspiracy theory message board[/i].

Excuse me, but I will be civil and on-point so long as I’m speaking with someone capable of proffering serious thought. When I’m talking to the guy who believes in alien contact conspiracies and/or that Sandy Hook was faked, and he’s insisting on mixing stimulating conversation with tangents into pure nonsense, I will become a bit looser. It’s good for people who entertain stupid and needlessly offensive ideas to develop a callus, anyhow.

In the end, you’ve chosen to take issue with my having used profanity and lobbed insults? Do other posters not use profanity? Do they not insult each other from time to time?

Indeed, they do. They also sometimes use words like “retard” and “queer”–which is fine with me, but it would seem that that would be a greater offense than “fucking idiot.”

By the way, show me where I “challenged his heritage” please.

4

800×534 37.6 KB

[quote]JEATON wrote:
Personalities aside, do you think this a fair assessment? Please share.

[/quote]

No it’s not.

It’s interesting to me how you began this thread with thought and reason, Jeaton…then at the end, it was like you were trying to stop yourself from vomiting as best you could…but you couldn’t. Then your biases came out.

I would imagine it’s because you 1) most likely lean to the Right and 2) smh has called you out on a few things (most of which I have tried to call “PWI” on since President Obama has been in office. Namely a) what would another President have done differently and b) show me where a given actions was different from other President’s. But this is another thread).

Back to the thread. I don’t think that smh believes (and I will let him speak for himself) that JP is unintelligent. Neither do I. As a matter of fact, he has posted some things that made me think “great post”.

However; perhaps like many of us, he APPEARS (by his post) to have a very narrow prism through which he views the world, mostly through a) guns and Second Amendment Rights and b) a Federal Government whose primary Goal is to conquer and enslave it’s People, via actions that only he and a select few can see. Everyone else are merely misinformed sheeple ready for the slaughter.

And then there is Sandy Hook and the murder of Chris Kyle.

When the former is viewed as a Grand Governmental Conspiracy orchestrated by the Feds to take away our guns; a conspiracy that involves numerous agencies, people, and State and Local Governments, involving either a) all VERY Left Wing People and/or b) such a fear of the Feds that literally HUNDREDS of people will not speak out…one will have to draw their own conclusions. It was all such an unbelievable set of arguments, I was at a loss for words (and still am). To smh’s credit, it was an argument that he wanted to challenge. Good for him.

I was even at a FURTHUR loss when Chris Kyle was afforded more compassion than those kids at Sandy Hook.

The net result is that I think “PWI” is enriched when people like smh challenge things like this. While I personally like “true” discussion (which make elections my favorite discussion Topic on “PWI”)…I’m out when it’s clear that there is no discussion at all…just someone holding firmly to beliefs that will most likely never change.

Just my thoughts.

Mufasa

5

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

I was even at a FURTHUR loss when Chris Kyle was afforded more compassion than those kids at Sandy Hook.

Mufasa[/quote]

Thank you very much for posting this. I thought exactly the same thing.

6

Never saw a thread where Jay Pierce claimed Sandy Hook to be a manufactured event. I would vehemently disagree with that assessment. What I would hope I would not do is then use this as my go to move to avoid addressing his points when I have no reasoned reply.

7

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

[quote]JEATON wrote:
Personalities aside, do you think this a fair assessment? Please share.

[/quote]

No it’s not.

It’s interesting to me how you began this thread with thought and reason, Jeaton…then at the end, it was like you were trying to stop yourself from vomiting as best you could…but you couldn’t. Then your biases came out.

I would imagine it’s because you 1) most likely lean to the Right and 2) smh has called you out on a few things (most of which I have tried to call “PWI” on since President Obama has been in office. Namely a) what would another President have done differently and b) show me where a given actions was different from other President’s. But this is another thread).

Back to the thread. I don’t think that smh believes (and I will let him speak for himself) that JP is unintelligent. Neither do I. As a matter of fact, he has posted some things that made me think “great post”.

However; perhaps like many of us, he APPEARS (by his post) to have a very narrow prism through which he views the world, mostly through a) guns and Second Amendment Rights and b) a Federal Government whose primary Goal is to conquer and enslave it’s People, via actions that only he and a select few can see. Everyone else are merely misinformed sheeple ready for the slaughter.

And then there is Sandy Hook and the murder of Chris Kyle.

When the former is viewed as a Grand Governmental Conspiracy orchestrated by the Feds to take away our guns; a conspiracy that involves numerous agencies, people, and State and Local Governments, involving either a) all VERY Left Wing People and/or b) such a fear of the Feds that literally HUNDREDS of people will not speak out…one will have to draw their own conclusions. It was all such an unbelievable set of arguments, I was at a loss for words (and still am). To smh’s credit, it was an argument that he wanted to challenge. Good for him.

I was even at a FURTHUR loss when Chris Kyle was afforded more compassion than those kids at Sandy Hook.

The net result is that I think “PWI” is enriched when people like smh challenge things like this. While I personally like “true” discussion (which make elections my favorite discussion Topic on “PWI”)…I’m out when it’s clear that there is no discussion at all…just someone holding firmly to beliefs that will most likely never change.
m

Just my thoughts.

Mufasa[/quote]

Not sure where you have been, but unlike you I have never pretended to be Switzerland. I am not neutral. I am conservative and make no apologies for being so. I come out of the same corner every round.

You identify with smh23 because you are so similar. You are both leftist who proclaim yourselves as centrist. Stop playing games and become more congruent.

I value congruency in people. I respect a person that knows his values and operates from that core.

8

[quote]JEATON wrote:
…Never saw a thread where Jay Pierce claimed Sandy Hook to be a manufactured event…[/quote]

Okay…

Then what were his views on Sandy Hook as you read them… and what were your thoughts on the exchanges between he and smh concerning Sandy Hook?

Mufasa

9

I think you put WAYYYYYY too much importance on the relationships in this forum JEATON
and you really need to get a life and keep selling those fuckin’ Cars.
I’m a helluva salesman myself, so I know what that “world” is like.
I’ve sold the high commission stuff like Siding, Insurance, and yes, even
Cars.
Sales people tend to be fuckin’ sociopaths anyway and we tend to move around from
job to job a lot lol…Capitalism NEEDS us crazy people! Being Bi-Lingual gave me
an edge in that profession too.
Relax JEATON, concern yourself with yourself, conserve your energy…All is well.

10

[quote]JEATON wrote:
Not sure where you have been, but unlike you I have never pretended to be Switzerland. I am not neutral. I am conservative and make no apologies for being so. I come out of the same corner every round.

You identify with smh23 because you are so similar. You are both leftist who proclaim yourselves as centrist. Stop playing games and become more congruent.

I value congruency in people. I respect a person that knows his values and operates from that core.
[/quote]

You just can’t help yourself, can you Jeaton?

Did you want people’s opinion on this thread or not? Or did you want them to just agree with you?

Not that it matters to me that much what others think…but I clearly know where my values and core lie…and its with, and in, America.

Mufasa

11

[quote]JEATON wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

[quote]JEATON wrote:
Personalities aside, do you think this a fair assessment? Please share.

[/quote]

No it’s not.

It’s interesting to me how you began this thread with thought and reason, Jeaton…then at the end, it was like you were trying to stop yourself from vomiting as best you could…but you couldn’t. Then your biases came out.

I would imagine it’s because you 1) most likely lean to the Right and 2) smh has called you out on a few things (most of which I have tried to call “PWI” on since President Obama has been in office. Namely a) what would another President have done differently and b) show me where a given actions was different from other President’s. But this is another thread).

Back to the thread. I don’t think that smh believes (and I will let him speak for himself) that JP is unintelligent. Neither do I. As a matter of fact, he has posted some things that made me think “great post”.

However; perhaps like many of us, he APPEARS (by his post) to have a very narrow prism through which he views the world, mostly through a) guns and Second Amendment Rights and b) a Federal Government whose primary Goal is to conquer and enslave it’s People, via actions that only he and a select few can see. Everyone else are merely misinformed sheeple ready for the slaughter.

And then there is Sandy Hook and the murder of Chris Kyle.

When the former is viewed as a Grand Governmental Conspiracy orchestrated by the Feds to take away our guns; a conspiracy that involves numerous agencies, people, and State and Local Governments, involving either a) all VERY Left Wing People and/or b) such a fear of the Feds that literally HUNDREDS of people will not speak out…one will have to draw their own conclusions. It was all such an unbelievable set of arguments, I was at a loss for words (and still am). To smh’s credit, it was an argument that he wanted to challenge. Good for him.

I was even at a FURTHUR loss when Chris Kyle was afforded more compassion than those kids at Sandy Hook.

The net result is that I think “PWI” is enriched when people like smh challenge things like this. While I personally like “true” discussion (which make elections my favorite discussion Topic on “PWI”)…I’m out when it’s clear that there is no discussion at all…just someone holding firmly to beliefs that will most likely never change.
m

Just my thoughts.

Mufasa[/quote]

Not sure where you have been, but unlike you I have never pretended to be Switzerland. I am not neutral. I am conservative and make no apologies for being so. I come out of the same corner every round.

You identify with smh23 because you are so similar. You are both leftist who proclaim yourselves as centrist. Stop playing games and become more congruent.

I value congruency in people. I respect a person that knows his values and operates from that core.
[/quote]

I don’t know any truly rational person who is a pure ideologue. The political landscape is not as black and white as you apparently believe it to be. As far as I can discern, Smh23 and Mufasa value balance, moderation, and compromise. They shun confirmation bias. They are the ones whose eyes can make out the various shades of grey. I respect someone who doesn’t approach a discussion with their mind already made up.

12

[quote]JEATON wrote:
Never saw a thread where Jay Pierce claimed Sandy Hook to be a manufactured event. I would vehemently disagree with that assessment. What I would hope I would not do is then use this as my go to move to avoid addressing his points when I have no reasoned reply. [/quote]

Fair enough about not having seen it. I have, however, not avoided a point of his.

13

[quote]JEATON wrote:

Not sure where you have been, but unlike you I have never pretended to be Switzerland. I am not neutral. I am conservative and make no apologies for being so. I come out of the same corner every round.

You identify with smh23 because you are so similar. You are both leftist who proclaim yourselves as centrist. Stop playing games and become more congruent.

I value congruency in people. I respect a person that knows his values and operates from that core.
[/quote]

So far as I can tell, the only point you’re making here is that Mufasa and I tend left of you. We consider ourselves centrists (perhaps I shouldn’t speak for M, but I view him as a centrist and a damn reasonable one at that), you consider us liberals. Is this your big complaint?

I’m sorry to break this to you, but I don’t give a damn whether or not you think me a liberal in disguise. You consider yourself a congruent, sturdy conservative…I might describe you differently if I were in a less civil mood at the moment. Should you care? No.

This is a place for people to debate and argue. Differences of opinion are not only natural ,but really, really good. Most of my favorite people around here are people with whom I disagree, sometimes profoundly. The only way to spoil that is to complain about it.

14

And by the way…“stop playing games and become more congruent”–I say exactly what I think on this board, as I’m sure do most others. So it would be welcome if you’d stop giving other people advice on their convictions as though you know exactly what they are.

15

What’s been so interesting over the years on “PWI” is how people are so ready to label people because of something they don’t agree with.

As smh said, we are Centrist…yet I am FIRMLY on the Right with many subjects (e.g. Government Size and Spending; 2nd Amendment Rights (thanks to my my friend Push); a Strong Military and support of Israel); and probably lean more Left on most social issues (like Gays serving openly in the Military).

What has mostly got me labled a “Leftie” on “PWI” is my support of President Obama and not getting into calling him “A Communist/Godless/Muslim/Anti-American, out to destroy all we have while taking away our guns and leading us to Armageddon”. Nor do I think that he will go down as the “worst” President ever. (However you measure those things).

If all this makes me a “Leftie” (in the eyes of “real” or “pure” Conservatives)…then I’ll just have to live with that.

Mufasa

16

One last interesting irony;

In my everyday, “Non-Internet” Life…I am considered “Conservative”…

Go figure…

Mufasa

17

I can’t believe I complemented you JEATON on starting interesting and thought-provoking threads in the Dr. Carson thread. What are you Dr. Phil now?

I don’t even frequent PWI regularly but from the little I’ve seen of Jay Pierce (the dude with the swimming Siberian tiger) I can say I think he’s loony and more than a little biased. SMH has a scientific approach grounded in facts, something that alludes the vast majority of PWI posters (however many there are left), who are all over 40.

18

Shit, I vote right of centre but I don’t give a fuck about the military, Israel or any social issues. I don’t care about: gay marriage (if it is legalised), drugs (if they are legalised), abortion, Israel (don’t care if Iran attacks 'em), military issues and probably more that I can’t think of right now. What I do care about is reasonable spending and policies designed to foster economic growth. For example, in reference to the other thread, I’m neutral on the flat tax as it pertains to my situation but for smart taxation that incentives investment. I’m for some government spending (obviously sustainable) but mainly don’t want to get taxed the fuck out.

19

[quote]JEATON wrote:

Personalities aside, do you think this a fair assessment? Please share.[/quote]

No. This forum did itself a great service by calling out and cleaning out the moonbats and conspiracists years ago. The return of Jay Pierce - a puzzlewit and first rate clown who has attempted to claim that the tragedy at Sandy Hook is a cooked-up conspiracy by the government to take away guns and that no chidlren were killed - isn’t anything to be proud of, and Smh23 has been more patient with him than I ever would be.

Fact is, intellectual integrity at some point requires rational people to stand up say “enough” to bad ideas and stupidity. No, “open-minded discussion” doesn’t mean privileging all ideas as “equal” and “worthy of respect”, nor does it require passivity in being frank with someone who is espousing plainly idiotic ideas. This is, truly, a “marketplace” for ideas, and some views have value, and some are junk. Saying so is a good thing, not a bad thing.

As for Smh23, we don’t agree on everything (nor should we), but he is a first-rate poster with great insight, and he knows how to actually debate. We need more Smh23’s, and fewer Jay Pierce’s around here, period.

20

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]JEATON wrote:

Personalities aside, do you think this a fair assessment? Please share.[/quote]

No. This forum did itself a great service by calling out and cleaning out the moonbats and conspiracists years ago. The return of Jay Pierce - a puzzlewit and first rate clown who has attempted to claim that the tragedy at Sandy Hook is a cooked-up conspiracy by the government to take away guns and that no chidlren were killed - isn’t anything to be proud of, and Smh23 has been more patient with him than I ever would be.

Fact is, intellectual integrity at some point requires rational people to stand up say “enough” to bad ideas and stupidity. No, “open-minded discussion” doesn’t mean privileging all ideas as “equal” and “worthy of respect”, nor does it require passivity in being frank with someone who is espousing plainly idiotic ideas. This is, truly, a “marketplace” for ideas, and some views have value, and some are junk. Saying so is a good thing, not a bad thing.

As for Smh23, we don’t agree on everything (nor should we), but he is a first-rate poster with great insight, and he knows how to actually debate. We need more Smh23’s, and fewer Jay Pierce’s around here, period.[/quote]

Too kind TB, and I know that you’re aware that the sentiment is mutual.