Why the fascination with Kimmer? #6

[golite]

Originally Posted by Mayberryfan

Okay. So other than Mclurky and Bamagal, do you other people here realize that a girl in the SEC (South Eastern Conference) has to go to CHURCH in the fall on Saturdays? These sacred services are comprised of 4 quarters and a half-time. The minister stands on the sidelines and wears a headset and the alterboys all have helmets and shoulderpads on. The altergirls wear some short robes, but it's okay! Our main hymnal isn't Amazing Grace but a nice little ditty that says "Rammer jammer, yellow hammer, give 'em hell, Alabama!"

<------------Bama wins! Yeah!

Back OT now: I am still not banned at KK's! I didn't make any new posts with my new av and siggy, but I have a few hundred posts over there so someone is bound to see it.

This morning (before church! ) I jumped on KK's and PM'ed some of the folks who seemed lost and told them that it was time to educate themselves and leave! One woman was worried about eating a salad with too many carrot shreds in it for heaven's sake. I didn't think I'd last long enough to get replies, but I did. The people were nice and promised to keep their eyes open.

So, here's to flying under the radar for a little longer!

~special message to Kat - So sorry for your loss!

Nitey night everyone! Huggies and Bless everyone's heart! Zzzzzzz

You went to a log splitting contest? .........................

[Reesie]

Originally Posted by golite

You went to a log splitting contest? .........................

[Essie]

Originally Posted by serenity_aus

Groovy. Are you in Aus or overseas? It's rather warm here at the moment! (and still no rain in sight )

I live in Darwin, so I know what hot is! Yeah I wish it would rain too, could do with a knock 'em down storm! (Would have pm'd you but not enough posts as I mostly lurk)

[Essie]

Patricia the judge from the newsletter

Kimkins-Newsletter#2[/quote]


I wish my hair would grow that quickly in six months

Also seems to have thinned out a bit, I could be wrong ...

[serenity_aus]

Hey Essie - don't you think the before looks a bit like Dawn Fraser LOL

[serenity_aus]

Originally Posted by Essie

I live in Darwin, so I know what hot is! Yeah I wish it would rain too, could do with a knock 'em down storm! (Would have pm'd you but not enough posts as I mostly lurk)

We had a storm run through here tonight. All of about 1mm of blimmen rain grr.

[ixtapacheryl]

Originally Posted by losingjusme

Kat,
I am so sorry for your loss.

I would like to extend my sympathy as well ..... My mother is 84 and she is at a rehab facility for a few weeks - falling down because of low blood pressure, etc. It's so frustrating - you want to see them make a complete turnaround - and then you realize it's not going to get better.

[Diana]

Originally Posted by cgkane

You know you're addicted to this thread when you have withdrawals.

That was me last night. I had to go into chat to try to get some fix!

[Diana]

Quote:
Originally Posted by golite
I was reading Tippy's Boycott Netrition plea earlier and I thought it was a really good idea.....

To order about $90 of stuff from Netrition today. Thanks Tippy!

My order will be here Monday!!!! Thanks Tippy!!!

[Diana]

Originally Posted by LISAinTN

Attention all past and present Kimkins affiliates!

On October 3rd, I emailed Heidi to ask that she pay me my affilate fees. They were only $45.00 because I had removed her banners from my website earlier in the month. I received an email from her in which she said they were paid by the 5th and she would ask them to do mine first. Thirty minutes later, I received an email from a "Brad Johnson" the supposed current affiliate manager. He told me they were reviewing my account for payment and that I needed to include my Social Security # for payment! Ummm, yea...sure. Do I have stupid written on my forehead? Like I'd give her my SS# so she can run off to Venezuela and become ME! LOL I wrote "him" back saying I received all my previous payments without the SS# and that with all the KK controversy going on, I would NOT be giving them my SS#. Of course, the 5th came and went and no payment. So, I wrote Heidi back this morning telling her what "Brad" said and that I would appreciate her having them pay me today. Here's what I received back.

"Hi Lisa,

The computer will not allow payment until your earnings reach the minimum $45.00 and there was a refund yesterday which subtracted an earned commission. Your current balance is $29.98.

It's your choice to not provide a social security number. Kimkins will send this email to the IRS with your name and address so they can contact you for the information.

Kimmer"

Was she threatening me with the last paragraph?? LOL Here was my final response to her:

"Kimmer,

Yes, please do forward it to them, since they already have my SS#, so they can contact me. I have a lot I'd like to tell them, myself.

Lisa"

So, now all of a sudden, a refund was posted to my account the day after I ask for payment? She's going to refund me right into the red until I owe her money. LOL

To get to main point of my post. If you know anyone who was or is a Kimkins affilate, PLEASE have them go into their accounts and first take a screen shot of what they are owed by Kimkins. Then have them change their contact information. Since the new site upgrade, there is a place in the affiliate accounts that asks for an SS#. I had never filled it in. This morning, I went in to delete my account which cannot be done. So, I changed all my contact information, name, address, phone number, etc. to bogus information. Exampe, I just put a single letter for both my first and last name, 123 "I Don't Think So" for the address and 123-456-1234 for the phone number. Just something to fill in the blanks so you can update it. PLEASE pass this around to people you know and feel free to continue reposting it off and on in this forum and any others. As a disclaimer, I am not accusing Heidi of anything, but with the present controversy, I think we all would agree that we would not want her or her employees to have our personal contact information, let alone our SS#'s. Since we KNOW there was no Vanessa, I'm sure there is no Brad either. Thanks for your help in advance.

Blessings,
Lisa

She is panicing and needs a new identity!! She will not stop!

[Diana]

Re:My conclusion about the Kimkins plan 4 Hours, 15 Minutes ago
THE GOOD

1. The kimmer controversy comes as no surprise to anyone who has watched the genesis of this business model. Kimkins.com was started with the clear mission statement of “raising a few extra bucks for my kids”. Within a very short period of time, the site became a revenue generating behemoth that seemed to have abandoned its original intent - bucks for the kids. Without careful explanation, that was bound to raise red flags and garner suspicion.

2.. In all the scam mongering and exposes that have gone on across the Internet in the past few months, no one has really addressed whether there exists any credible science to support the oft repeated claims of the diet being "dangerous" or "life threatening". Actually, all that rhetoric reminds me a lot of what Atkins people complain about or are subjected to over at LCF. It smacks of diet-guru duelling. The nay-sayers have been circling kimkins for quite a while now and must be overjoyed at the discovery of the fake photos and an overweight kimmer. Still, none of the debunkers have yet fronted the scientific evidence that the diet is dangerous.

3. The whole evolution of the kimkins phenomenon smacks of a very well orchestrated confidence scam except for three things: a. The diet actually works! This isn't some Chinese herbal tea that melts fat away whilst changing your hair colour and ridding you of cellulite. It's basically Atkins with a lot less fat. Atkins (and Stillmans) are both supported by science, and b. It’s a very modest, one-off cost that delivers much, much more than its represented value proposition c. The value proposition remains unchanged and continues to deliver value.

4. I think kimmer is a victim of her own celebrity. She started life posting tirelessly, pleasantly and knowledgably to LCF members; she got a following, that following turned into a solid fan _base_ which became a superstar of the Internet almost overnight. That kimmer lacked the skills to manage such spectacular growth is not surprising. It would have posed a challenge to the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, a Harvard grad or someone routinely hanging out at NASA.

5. So kimmer turns out to be overweight. My personal view is that kimmer did lose all the weight using kimkins and has subsequently regained it. This diet has worked for me many times, and has worked for many, many people, despite the hysteria of ex-kimkin'ers claiming detrimental health effects, so it probably worked for her too. Because of a number of health matters, I have regular blood tests and those tests show how healthy I am.

6. The many, many stories of kimmer’s weekend water fasting et al I really doubt. It’s a shame she felt she had to resort to fantabulism to maintain her support _base_.

7. I think kimmer got some very bad advice. If someone said to her "Hey, every diet scheme uses fake photos and stories" she may not have clearly thought through the plan and foreseen the consequences. Or if the advice was “We’re now a marketing company and the rules of marketing say blahblah……………….. so let’s put up these photos as representations of weight the diet can achieve” then she may have taken that advice. I’ve seen senior marketers do this from time-to-time and they get caught out every time. Consumer laws say that if you show it can be done, you must be able to prove it.

8. I think there is a definite howler-monkey, baying-for-blood tone in the debunkers who are revelling in being able to take kimmer down which has little to do with kimmer's behaviour and more to do with scoring points off a diet guru. Some of the sanctimonious banging on really smacks of contrary-diet-philosophy points scoring.

9. It’s pretty unlikely that kimmer started out on LCF with the long-term view of scamming $60 from 4000 subscribers, as had been claimed. If so, she must be the most tactical, practiced, forward-planning scam artist ever. I think she started out genuinely trying to help people and developed a following. We all know what happened from there.

10. I don't think refunding memberships is necessary whilst the site remains open and the community in tact.

THE BAD

1. It's been widely reported that kimmer is a compulsive liar and most likely a high functioning psychopath. These are both considered to be neurological disorders, most likely congenital. Her behaviour prior to her expose (criminal record for scams) and her handling of the situation since, gives some support to this view. At this stage, it's worth mentioning that an estimated 8% of the American population are psychopathic and almost none of them act out like Ted Bundy. Most of them do what kimmer is alleged to have done.

2. As far as scams go, this one is fairly timid. She posted some fake photos, she made up stories about her own and other's results, she treated some people in her employ badly; by Enron standards, not so spectacular a scam. And, again I say, the diet does work, the community still continues to function, the entry fee was one off and pretty cheap.

3. Just so we're clear: I have little sympathy for kimmer although I have sympathy for the situation she now finds herself in. If she ends up in jail for 2 years, well that happens sometimes when you lie to people however the screaming monkey-babble debunkers have all conveniently forgotten how many hours, and tireless hours, she spent supporting and posting to LCF'ers and how many people lost weight directly as a result of that. I don't think the beneficiaries of that support, who remain here, should forget that either.

I’m going to continue to do the kimkins diet and support the community. I won’t support the revenue area of the site, and it should be disabled immediately if she’s going to stand any chance in court. I don’t believe that kimmer is out of the picture and for her to continue to take revenue under the circumstances constitutes fraud.

kimmer: I know you're reading this. You must act NOW to avert disaster. You're quite clearly not getting the best advice or, if you are, you're not listening to it. There is too much Internet heat for you to be able to slide away gracefully and without recourse, if that's what you're banking on.

Saying you're removing before and after photos because you're re-configuring the site is ridiculous. Not a single person is buying that and it only further erodes your credibility. Likewise, deleting "negative" posts - it only adds to distrust. You lied to people, you must allow a reasonable level of feedback about that. Certainly, delete the overtly mischievous, but you engaged in misrepresentations; you're gonna have to take some heat for that and the sooner the better.

I hope you’re receiving advice as I'm sure the debunkers have contacted Federal authorities. At the very least, the minute a syndicated news service picks up your story, the Feds will be interested. This is not something that you can hope will fade away.
Please note, although no boardcode and smiley buttons are shown, they are still useable

I love this post! 'cept I see no good from kimmers diet.... Er I mean Heidi Diaz...I don't see how she an continue the diet... it's dangerous

[Diana]

Re:My conclusion about the Kimkins plan 1 Hour, 9 Minutes ago
I honestly don't know why it's all being swept under the rug. People aren't silly, as I posted last night - and it was deleted - many of the pictures are fake, that's just not right. It's hard enough trying to lose weight without having to be demoralised by looking at fake pictures of the founder.

Of course this diet works, any diet works ie energy intake is less than energy used. But different diets suit different people. I paid membership and I'm certainly not happy with the deceit and lies, and blatent false advertising - that's a crime. But there are people here who need support. I was around when keeping calories as low as possible was encouraged, I saw it myself. I don't agree with it. Not for me, anyway so I upped my calories, put on a bit, now I'm back to my journey. Ohters may be fine, but it is up to them to monitor their own health.

I don't post a lot, but came out of lurkdome as there were some people I saw with some very dangerous eating patterns, and I felt I must step in and try to get them to examine what they were eating, especially when starting to exercise. Even the admins are encouraging the higher calorie intake now. They also weren't getting many responses so I felt I had to say something.

Sometime we have to step back in this society and not expect everything to happen 'now', sometimes it takes time, fo me slower loss is better.

OG

Course the diet works, you starve someone you will lose weight, fat muscle, bones

[Violet Skye]

I have to wonder about Bud and Al's pics (besides wondering whether their last name is actually Bundy ) - I honestly can't tell which one is the "Before" and which one is the "After". As for Angela, one sigh that there's been some tinkering is the fact that her wristwatch is worn on her left arm in one pic and her right in the other. I don't know anyone who is inconsistent about which wrist they wear their watch on, unless they have a carpal tunnel splint on the usual arm.

My new rule of thumb is to not take as seriously any first post from someone who comes in, guns a-blazin', to give this thread and its posters a lecture about board manners. I am confident that the mods will let us know if/when we have crossed the line, and I respect any judgment calls that they make.

I also want to comment about the phenomenon the Fascination thread has become. I have never had the opportunity to be involved so directly in something which has had the potential to change many lives in a positive way. We have shone the light on a massive fraud that was not only affecting their wallets (bad enough...) but was also affecting many peoples' health. Money is a renewable resource, for most of us. Health may not be. When I read the posts which dealt with the loss of a parent, I imagined the same posts being replicated by the family members of Kimkins dieters. The difference would have been that many of the lost parents would not have lived to as ripe an old age. I think of all the kids cheated out of that much time with their moms, and I have to conclude that yes, the end does justify the means.

[Diana]

Re:My conclusion about the Kimkins plan 48 Minutes ago
I'm not so upset by the low cals or any part of the regime, really. There's enough quality research around to support low cal/low carb as an eating plan as much as there is to support any eating plan, really. The biological effects of this diet I suspect are fine; the psychological maybe a bit more worrisome, in some cases.

I'm offended by the lies and the misrepresentations, even though they don't affect me directly. I joined long, long before the Russian girls appeared on the site or before kimmer anthro-morphed into a 24 year old brown-eyed, brunette so the misrepresentations didn't lure me.

I do think it's a shame that what was a very good community has been tainted by stupidity. There was no reason for kimmer to do what she did. The community, and her revenue, would have flourished with the legitimate success stories. You'll note that I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt here. I'm saying these were acts of stupidity, not greed.

Now, she faces certain prosecution, possibly even at a Federal level, and perhaps even gaol time. Not only will the amount of revenue she's earned be drastically eroded by legal fess but any successful action may result in her having to pay restitution.

Had she just stuck to the truth and honest pictures she would have still made a sizable income and would not have ended up as America's No. 1 Most Wanted for Internet Scams.

A number of Federal agencies have been itching to find a scam test case and she's handed it to them by her own stupidity.

Are you in Australia? I'm on the east coast.
Please note, although no boardcode and smiley buttons are shown, they are still useable

How long will it take to disapear?

[Sherrie_lc]

Originally Posted by serenity_aus

We had a storm run through here tonight. All of about 1mm of blimmen rain grr.

The weather is very mild here in Adelaide atm around the 20s and a touch cooler again where I am. Meant to be raining this week but they said that the other week and it didn't happen so we'll see

[boobookity]

I had to go back to my old avatar. Someone named Igor wanted to buy me and dh was not amused. Here is the new "it" Halloween costume for this year:

[GinaC]

Originally Posted by mrsmenopausal

Each time I reply and scroll up to the top that option isn't there. No view first unread for me.

Morning MrsM

This is what I do to keep my place:

I right click the reply (or quote) button and select "open in new window". That way I can just click back on the old window and carry on exactly where I left off.

Kat - I'd also like to offer my condolences on the loss of your mother. I'll keep you and your family in my prayers.

[boobookity]

Kat,
I'm so very sorry to hear about your Mom.

[HoneyBee2]

Originally Posted by BlueBrooke

I know this is going to come as a shock to everyone involved in this grand endeavor, but whether or not money was paid to access the KK BBS is *irrelevant.* A TOS is a TOS and how that TOS is enforced is up to the owner of the website, whether access was paid for or not.

The only difference is, if you are banned from the KK BBS, you can file a complaint (PayPal, small claims court, etc.) and get a refund. If you have issues with the way the LCF TOS is enforced, you have to just take your ball and go home. Payment for access doesn't give you any additional "rights."

I seems that you didn't understand my original point, because nothing that you have written addresses it. Unless you're trying to say that it's okay for LCF to have and enforce a TOS because this board is free, but KK is supposed to leave every post untouched because the BBS requires paid access?

Both the KK board and the LCF board posts are subject to TOS statements which are enforced by their mods. The LCF TOS is not supposed to allow "mean spirited" posts. Considering the number that are made here, it seems clear that the mods have decided that the TOS provisions don't apply when the posts in question are directed to anyone involved with the KK operation, whether in an administrative capacity or simply members. First it was "Kimmer," then it was Tippy, then it was SingingLass, and now it's this "fawn" person that's being made fun of.

My original post was to point out the hypocrisy of deriding the double standard at KK, while at the same time ignoring the double standard that's being practiced here. And it's not just that -- it's the "we have nothing to hide" stance and the demand for information from "them" that many here aren't willing to divulge about themselves (who is ducky? who cares! s/he's on our side!) -- there's definitely a one-way street being advocated by the people most active in this thread. Oh -- and let's not forget the copyright violations that are still going on here.

And as far as my "right" to say these things here, I fully expect *my* posts to be gone before the sun comes up -- which is why I don't spend much time at LCF anymore, and prefer newsgroups instead. They are a little rougher, but you aren't censored there, no matter what your opinion is.

And finally, I'd like to point out that it is *exactly* this one-sided view this group has of their cause that resulted in the Wikipedia article being pulled. Many situations that are current events have Wikipedia articles -- but they have to be written in a non-biased way. One has only to read one or two pages from any of the "Fascination" threads to see that that isn't possible.

All I'm saying is that there's a lot of stone-throwing going on -- and a lot of people who don't realize they live in glass houses are tossing boulders.

I wanted to want until the sun rose before responding and it appears your words are still here and thus so is my valid reason for saying there is a difference in how LCF manages their boards than how Kimkins manages theirs.
I understood your points and I did address them as they were written, which was the idea that you read hypocrisy in the original poster’s comment of how the Kimkins ran their boards there and how they banned members. There is no hypocrisy in saying that here on LCF even though you suggested in your previous post that they are as guilty as kimkins in that they operate the same way. I disagree and I addressed that in my original response.

I pointed out how Kimkins has been shown time and time again to ban those who express an opinion that didn’t support kimkins or doesn’t agree with the majority there, but LCF has been allowing posts of equal content to remain no matter if you agree with the original poster or not.
You yourself said you read the posts of those that disagreed with things being said here, therefore they must remain. That shows that LCF’s interpretation of the TOS is the same for each member posting. If you read the other posts of those who didn’t agree they could be deemed “mean spirited” as well and yet they are here and so is the member. Whether you agree with the interpretation or not it is the same for each member. The same is not true at Kimkins. What Kimkins is at fault for is not their interpretation of the TOS but their random interpretation of the TOS.

As you can see there was no misunderstanding on my part as to what your stated point was in your original post. That is unless you think RANDOM interpretation of the TOS at Kimkins is the same as what could be viewed by some as a changed interpretation of the TOS here at LCF?

I am also not shocked at you opinion of what is relevant when discussing the two boards, because I never said that the TOS contract has any less meaning at either location. However, I am shocked that someone who’s initial post brought up a business and how they run their boards would not find the fact that one website is free to members while others are paying for that service as something not relevant. That is what is shocking to me personally.

The paid membership was pointed out to demonstrate how each business has a different level of responsibility to its members. Remember I was replying in part to your post on stating how a business can run its website however they see fit. That reads as an encompassing statement of being free of any responsibility to the consumer and that would not be true.

The only difference you now say in regards to Kimkins upholding the TOS is a refund or legal recourse if they do not. Well that was my point in bringing up the issue of it being a paid membership to demonstrate how their level of responsibility is greater to its members on a business level. Now it appears you do recognize that a business can not be run however they see fit in cases when one pays to use that website, because if they do there is legal ramification. So it appears it was relevant.

The statement of ['Payment for access doesn't give you any additional "rights." ] is not correct. It does give me additional rights at Kimkins, something called consumer rights, so you are incorrect to say my rights at Kimkins are no greater than my rights here. They are and so is that business’s level of responsibility. I have a right to use that board within the TOS guidelines and they have a responsibility to provide the board to me or be in violation of my consumer rights.

So I got your written points in your first post and addressed them. However, if you are asking if I got your underlying point or the innuendos in your first post then that is a different question, but the answer is still the same.

I noted how you choose the word “crusade” because you were attempting to mock the idea that we are accomplishing something here with this thread.
I also noted that point again reiterated when you said you didn’t want to hear the heartfelt "but we're the good guys so it's okay" rant.
Then of course the reference in calling us “the pack” could have been your attempt to say we attack those who post in disagreement like a pack of dogs or wolves.
There see don’t get confused because I got those points too but I overlooked them in responding the first time. But you mistook by generosity in overlooking those attempts to slight as a weakness or a lack of understanding your point and that was a mistake on your part not mine.

[MyCannelloni]

Originally Posted by HoneyBee2

There....There....MC... It appears you have acute Europinittus.
...

Thanks, HoneyBee! I recalibrated my sense of humor visiting Borat does Kimkins; I think it worked!

[Peskypict]

Katinsac

I'm sorry about your mom.