My wife and I are being viciously attacked by a couple in Riverside, California, where we live. The couple is obviously well connected in the local stake, so they have enlisted over two dozen of their groupies to post bad reviews on our Yelp and Google business listings. They are relentless in the pursuit of costing us our livelihoods after a mishap in which we offered our apology and gave them all their money back. There is no way in hell I would ever give a recommendation to anyone to do business with ANY mormon for the rest of my life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/05/2020 03:03PM by q.

And what does that have to do with "cancel culture?"

Well, they are making an effort to destroy our efforts of the last decade in building a livelihood. I'd say that is an ingredient of the "cancel culture," canceling us out of the economy. And they want to destroy our name and force us out of the city we live in. What is left after that?

But they didn't have to do this.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And what does that have to do with "cancel
> culture?"

A lot. Both are attempts to create unpeople, because they do not follow the prevailing doctrine. You can't burn heretics anymore, you can just airbrush them out.

The "cancel culture" phenomenon is typically a response to someone's politically incorrect social attitudes or statements. In other words it is not based upon whether a person performs some service in an unprofessional or unsatisfactory manner, it is based upon what they do or say. No once claims, for example, that the anti-gay baker, who refuses to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, should be "cancelled" because they do not make good cakes. That misses the point.

In the present case--whatever the merits turn out to be--the question is about the performance of some service, and about the consumer's response to that service. The "cancel" part of any intent is based upon the service, not upon the beliefs of the service provider. The OP's suggestion that no, its about some anti-exMormon agenda, is only tenable as a "cancel culture" effect if it can be shown that other exMormons are being given the same treatment--notwithstanding the quality of their business services. But, the context here is not that at all.

It is very dangerous to undermine consumer advocacy groups, who weed out bad business practitioners, by labeling them as somehow part of the cancel culture.

Nonsense.

"Cancel culture" is a foolish right-wing notion in the first place. It means cancelling someone's appearance or speech for political reasons, all the more ironic because those who use the term routinely insist on maintaining the "cancellation" of Native Americans' and black American's experiences as well as abuses by law enforcement or the crimes of their favored politicians.

But assuming arguendo that "cancel culture" means anything significant, it is the erasure of opposing political views. What "q" is doing here is something different: complaining about losing a business dispute. S/he suffers is no punishment for disagreeing with "prevailing doctrine," in your words, and "no attempt to create "unpeople [sic]."

S/he uses "cancel culture" the way a thoughtless teenager might call someone a "Fascist" or you might deride others as "cultural Marxists." It is simply an indirect way of saying "I don't like you."

It's not a notion, it's a phrase used to discuss an actual ongoing phenomenon. I don't think it is particularly offensive as such. Cancel culture is not murderous, at least not yet.

People are trying to get monuments, films, music or whatever cancelled and removed from circulation. In some cases, people like Kevin Spacey are being cancelled - Spacey appears to be a bad person, but he's also a fine actor. Does that mean everyone else in his films should be dragged down with him? What about JK Rowling? Hero to zero in no time. She was in one minute, and out the next. Hardly a screaming rightist.

So yes, I see this as the same phenomenon. The so called left and right often behave the same way - same owners in many cases. I don't trust online review sites for this reason, or for the fact that many people get employees or friends to write positive reviews! (I've been asked...)

Franz Liszt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's not a notion, it's a phrase used to discuss
> an actual ongoing phenomenon. I don't think it is
> particularly offensive as such. Cancel culture is
> not murderous, at least not yet.

To the contrary, Jordan. What you lot disingenuously describe as "cancel culture" has always been with us, and it is murderous. Hitler cancelled Jews' history and character in order to facilitate their isolation and slaughter. Stalin sullied his rivals' histories and values before, during, and after their torture and murder. Pol Pot did the same thing. And historically, so too did the protectors of slavery and its legacy and those who wanted to dispossess the Native Americans.

But that virulent "cancellation" bears scant resemblance to the shunning of criminals, other miscreants, and juvenile exhibitionists that so exercises you pearl clutchers. There is no obligation on the part of society or organizations to give a forum to people with extremist and irrational views: you can post online, write books explaining your opinions, or hold public demonstrations but no civic body is obligated to give you a platform and a megaphone.


--------------
> So yes, I see this as the same phenomenon.

This is just silly. Negative reviews on Yelp do not censorship make. You manly men on the right need to decide what your identity actually is. You can't reasonably act as if you are strong and independent on the one hand and complain about how mean the world is to you on the other.


---------------
> I don't trust online
> review sites for this reason, or for the fact that
> many people get employees or friends to write
> positive reviews! (I've been asked...)

Fascinating.

Wow. You're...late to the party on that one. And no one's "dragging down" the people who appeared with him in films, unless you're insinuating that they were sexually assaulting minors too.

I think the term has taken on a much more general meaning. I've seen it used when there is a mass pile-on to take someone down over an issue that is otherwise resolvable or potentially forgivable -- hence, to "cancel" someone. I think it is related to "brigading" -- "Brigading is an online harassment tactic where a group of people rally against an individual (or occasionally against a small group of people) in a coordinated, sustained and organized way." (Urban Dictionary)

Yes.

It started as a right-wing objection to the cancellation of public speeches by such intellectual giants as Milo Yiannopoulos and Alex Jones, then became a massive pearl-clutch when black people complained about the public celebration of slavery's defenders. And now it means "people who don't like my business."

Like the term "Fascist," "cancel culture" has lost virtually all meaning it might once have had. Such terms, in my opinion, do little to advance discussion.

Here's a good discussion of the terms "cancel" (used in a slang sense to mean murder in the late 90s,) and its evolution into "cancel culture" around 2015-ish. You are correct, it the phrase was originally used to combat discrimination and racism. It widened to the "Me-too" movement and other issues.

https://www.dictionary.com/e/pop-culture/cancel-culture/

Yes, the meaning has definitely broadened into the wider culture. I personally see it as when hive-mind takes over to gleefully take someone down over an otherwise resolvable issue.

To get back to the OP, I think the term would apply if the unhappy customer convinced his friends who had never used the OP's business to write terrible reviews as well.

Have you consulted a lawyer about this?

Canceling people is a moral deficiency. I've had issues with others before, just like everyone has. When a mistake is made and an apology and restitution are given that is the end of it in nearly every case I've ever encountered. That should have been the end of it. I'm not going to clog the courts wit this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/05/2020 03:53PM by q.

q Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That should have been the end of it. I'm not going to
> clog the courts wit this.
===============================

How is that "should" working out for you?
Evidence suggests it us not.

Don't count on Mormons being kind, reasonable, or just. They are (generally) not.
They tend to be judgemental, with a streak of the sadistic, and very much enjoy stoning people. It helps them feel more righteous.
Look to your own experience in verifying this assertion. (It's a self-selection phenomenon)


People like this are actually cowards - which is why they move only in mindless flocks, conforming to any authority without question. They're governed by fear.

A well-crafted cease-and-desist warning from a competent attorney will put an end to it. File if necessary. Never get to court.

Though the "should" world is better, must live in the real one.

Best of luck either way. Hope it works out.


(P.S. - do you now notice in retrospect how apology made it worse? Why is that?)

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Have you consulted a lawyer about this?
===============================

Bingo.

Document everything.

Don’t Yelp and Google offer some way to dispute bad reviews?

Yelp does, but the review has to be completely off topic. They mixed their attacks with some business related abuse, so... And Google requires an act of God. Or of Sergey Brin.

It sounds to me like your business practices are being attacked (fairly or unfairly), not you personally.

It is perfectly fair to share one's personal business experiences on public forums in the interest of consumer protection, even if this sometimes involves harsh and unfair results. The underlying transaction, and your "mishap" are not specified; and neither is your "apology." The fact that you returned their money does not necessarily mean full restitution for whatever damage you may have caused. They could have suffered emotional and/or monetary damages that go beyond a mere return of their money.

In short, this strikes me as an attempt on your part to "Mormonize" the consequences of your own business mistake. Until you provide details of the nature of this transaction; and what went wrong; and what communications were exchanged in an effort to make things right, you have not earned any sympathy here. And frankly, I doubt that Mormons would ban together to persecute you, or undermine your business, if there wasn't some underlying issue you have not told us about and that remains unresolved.

The particulars are not to be shared here. You obviously missed the tone of the post.

But CA is correct. You can pitch any story you want, with any "tone" you want, but we are under no obligation to accept a tale with no substantiation at all.

Mormonism requires people to accept propositions without evidence: ex-Mormonism does not.

I would want to read a rebuttal review from the business owner explaining what happened and your actions to resolve the issue. I've seen these on Yelp, BBB, etc.

I would need to know if the root cause of the mistake has been corrected and if you took actions in good faith fully correcting the issue. I am a forgiving customer if I read both sides of the story and can judge by myself who was fair and who overreacted. Everyone knows there are pissy customers out there.

It sounds like you are trying to "Cancel Culture" their bad experience. Not knowing exactly what they had to do to resolve the mistake makes it hard to know if they are overreacting.

I hope you can get enough good reviews to override the bad apple review over time or have it refuted.

Yes, there can be a rebuttal review. Or the business owner can state that a reviewer has never been a customer of their business, if that is the case.

I agree with you on this and yes it might not fit everyone's definition of cancel culture but it is certainly inspired by it. If you can get me a link I might can help you.

Finally the truth is coming out.

Mormons are just as disgusting as other people when they can get away with it.