Not according to James. And it wouldn't surprise me if James was also stalking you about your biz. You have to understand that over the years we've caught these people in numerous IP traps, they've been social pariah'd (anonymous posts revealed to everyone). Type in stalke-r without the hyphen and it turns into "ferret". James has been caught numerous times stalking a number of people. That is fact.
I have no reason to lie. On one occasion, James registered the moniker "Sean Findley" and stalked me and others on an defunct red board, telling people as Sean Findley that he wanted to grind up his son into bone gruel or eat a "Jem Sammich".
I doubt it. Ferret Ass stalks registered posters who are actually doing something with their lives and dare talk about it publicly. He stalks me about having a degree. He stalks Kingmambo about being some backoffice dude. He stalks you about your business. He stalks gumby about a litany of other things.
I am sure that I have. However, relative to the average, my truth detecting skills are pretty solid. That leaves me in a position to simply be less vulnerable than the average person. However, I could be destroyed by some Slick Liar tomorrow. Never would I suggest that it couldn't happen.
I agree, that one should cultivate some bullshitting skills. But why should success be measured through Bill Gates or Warren Buffet? Or politicians? Why do some of you persist in having this ludicrous striving mentality where one day you too will have this level of power?
What is wrong with being better relative to the average and just leaving it at that? You can be an honest person and still make a solid living and enjoy a great, financially secure life that is relative to the average.
The truth always works better. Truth gives you a massive amount of leverage. If someone ever attempts to corner you because they think you are a Slick Liar, and god forbid they do it in front of others, you can destroy their asses with the truth.
Well, I suppose it depends. I can bullshit with people about programming, (as a weak example) because I've been doing it since I was ten. However, I'll freely admit that while I am a decent and innovative programmer for little apps and such (such as raping the entire live365.com database), I do not possess an engineer's mind. Thus I would never make a good software engineer, nor could I handle programming with high level mathematics. However, if a Slick Liar were to come into this realm and bullshit about differential equations, linear algebra and vectors etc, I know enough to where I could tell if he is lying. I know that this is a silly example, but this actually happened! I informed the company that this guy isn't who he says he is and they should at least check to see if his engineering degree was the real deal.
Everyone lies habitually. It is the nature of the mind to confabulate. However, some people have a sense of morality and they make a conscious effort to keep that shit at a minimum. I fall into that category. Others, upon realizing how easy it is to dupe others and take advantage of them, simply keep pressing the boundary to see what they can get away with. They do this because they have no moral boundary. They are sociopaths.
A habitual liar wouldn't admit that he delivers pizza and goes to school in his 30s as an undergrad. It just wouldn't happen. Instead, I would have concocted a more elaborate story to present myself as something that I am not.
In fact, that is what most of the people here do. Most of them are eventually outed. Who is behind many of these outings?
With slick liars you simply ask questions. That might be manipulative and aggressive to intimidate you not to ask questions.
When you ask a slick liar who is a vice president who started out as a secretary what their job function is.....because you are genuinely curious what it is that they do for a living....and they give you a response like "I help keep the lights on", you know you are dealing with a Slick Liar.
Again, it is probability! Slick Liars construct these elaborate stories about themselves. Eventually, at some point, they will make a mistake. To catch a mistake, one must simply have more knowledge of an event. For example, a Slick Liar might say that he enjoys Motley Crue, too, and he attended a concert in San Francisco in July of 1987. Hell, what a coincidence, you also went to that concert in July. You start asking questions about this concert, and NONE of the information happens to be true. You were there, so you'd give him the benefit of the doubt if even a percentage of the information were true.
To catch someone who you suspect is a Slick Liar, you simply wait for the opportunity to where you have more knowledge about an event than he does. It could take weeks or months, but probability will catch up to the slick liar.
Now, imagine the reaction of the Slick Liar when he KNOWS that you have him cornered?
Looks like a large swath of people, those who you presume to be an underclass, is beneath you. That smacks of elitism. And those who put energy into supporting an elitist veneer are VERY much like Sloot, the subject of this thread.
1. any story telling ability
2. energy behind story telling
3. tugs on earlobes, fusses with hair
4. raises eyebrows while making points in conversation
5. leans forward and just gently invades your personal space
6. touches you, such as puts hand on shoulder while making a point
7. avoids answers to direct questions
8. changes subject when asked question about story
9. is religious
10. has a sales pitch like delivery
11. Becomes aggressive when asked personal questions
12. Raises tone slightly when asked personal questions
13. Voice quivers just so slightly when linking lies together
14. lips purse when talking
15. gazes into your eyes not to communicate but to intimidate
Most habitual liars are relatively harmless. They tell little lies here and there to bolster there stories and their credibility. They accentuate and exaggerate. Another class of liar confabulates entire stories, constructs sequences of events that never occurred.
Each type of liar is easy to spot. There are little tells. Hand gestures, eye movements, little things that give them away.
I can tell when someone is lying just by looking at them. I can tell within seconds. What is very interesting, from my past experience, is that within these few seconds, these people can tell that I am one of the few who can see right through them. After, they look at me as a threat, and attempt to sabotage me. Sociopaths? Perhaps.
What is sad is that you are right - people fall for a slick talker. They'd fire a performer at work, a star, and keep on board the slick talker, an underperformer.
Is it no wonder that so many companies go out of business?
She wasn't oblivious. Had to have suspected. Did it to further her career. But we are talking about Bill Clinton, a man noted for making and breaking careers.
The other guy in comparison, Clark, is no Bill Clinton.
Again, it all depends on how sensitive people with power were to Clark's claims of being a Rockefeller. If it could be shown that others were duped then you'd be right.
I just can't imagine that in ten years, nobody made a stink about it. In a way, that'd be like me wearing a Hell's Angels jacket with a 1 percenter patch. I could probably get away with it for awhile, but at some point a real Hell's Angel is going to check that shit and probably shank me upon discovering that I was a fake.
Your theory might be true if it could be shown that Clark had the ability to convince others that he was a Rockefeller. This guy had to have accompanied Sandra to meetings and other events. They both would have had to have one whopper of a story to convince many, many people that this fuckhead was a Rockefeller.
Regarding basic probability, you would think that at one point in ten years, at least a few people would have seen through it and blew the whistle.
I think you are engaging in excellent critical thinking, and could be right, but it makes slightly more sense that Sandra might have had her doubts but so wanted to believe that he was a Rockefeller, it took her ten years to snap out of the delusion.
Just because she has a high finance/econ IQ doesn't mean anything. People like Sandra have been sheltered most of their lives and aren't privy to how the human mind functions. The average human mind, the average bloke who stands next to her at 7/11 with a Schlitz Malt in hand, while she buys a pack of gum to help cover her halitosis at the next meeting.
She's oblivious to everything around her. Most people with power are. That is why they invest so much into protecting their little precious bubbles.