Why the fascination with Kimmer? #6

[LISAinTN]

Originally Posted by SandraBB

If she's running the program legally or is taking the advice of a lawyer, she will require all affiliates to fill out a W-9 which requires your SSN. If she pays any affiliate more than $600 of the course of the year, it is required. Most companies require that you provide this info upon signing up, though some will pay you until you hit the $600 mark then it's over until you comply. At the end of the year, she has to send you a 1099-MISC with your earnings, which you file with your taxes. Affiliate earnings are not tax free, it's like self employment income. Kimmer then files a 1096 with the IRS in January to report what she paid to you, and the IRS requires that she she includes your SSN.

She has to report what she paid the affiliates, otherwise the full amount is considered income for her and is taxable. The IRS will know how much money she's raked in, PayPal will automatically report her considering the large amount of money that has passed through that account. If she ends up being charged with fraud, perhaps her chances of an audit might increase

I agree that giving out your SSN is not a good idea, but you have to give her some sort of legal ID number. You can apply for a TIN (taxpayer id number) online or by phone and receive it in less than a minute. You can give her that number safely and without fear she'll steal your identity.

Thanks for your reply. I have a tax ID #, but I doubt I'll give her that either. I have my own business, unrelated to the affiliate thing and already included what I made doing the affiliate thing for her, as income, but with a question to ask my accountant about it because she has not even paid me $100.00. THAT is why I questioned her all of a sudden wanting my SS# after a couple of earlier payments in which it was not required AND she didn't ask for it until I asked to be paid the $45.00 that was on my account. Of course, now it's not there because within a day of asking for that money, a refund was supposedly posted to my account to bring me under the $45.00 amount. I'm sorry to be so cynical, but I think I have good reason considering the source. lol

[pazinhim]

Originally Posted by Peskypict

Katinsac

I'm sorry about your mom.

Katinsac, so am I. I had to go back to read what happened. I'm sorry for your loss...

[HoneyBee2]

Originally Posted by AmyJuli

Hey, Honeybee2... this has been bugging me and I just have to ask. Why is the font in some of your posts HUGE? In other's it's normal? Inquiring minds want to know.

Whatever do you mean?

I just mess around with the font and size. I don't know how to save the font I want as a default which means it changes because I am lazy at times and don't feel like highlighting my post and changing the font or size. Then there are times I am in a hurry and don't change it.

The reason I even fiddle the font and size is because I can be verbose and have long posts. The larger font and changing the font tend to help me be able to read others post when they are on the long side so I try to make note of that when writing a post myself.
It also helps my post not to blend in so much with my siggy. For me at least it is difficult to read some posts that are longer and if they there is not much room between the siggy and the message.
No real rhyme or reason to it unless I am posting the lists or trying to get someones attention but then I will usually bold whatever I am emphasizing.

[Lisa46]

Originally Posted by HoneyBee2

Whatever do you mean?

I just mess around with the font and size. I don't know how to save the font I want as a default which means it changes because I am lazy at times and don't feel like highlighting my post and changing the font or size. Then there are times I am in a hurry and don't change it.

The reason I even fiddle the font and size is because I can be verbose and have long posts. The larger font and changing the font tend to help me be able to read others post when they are on the long side so I try to make note of that when writing a post myself.
It also helps my post not to blend in so much with my siggy. For me at least it is difficult to read some posts that are longer and if they there is not much room between the siggy and the message.
No real rhyme or reason to it unless I am posting the lists or trying to get someones attention but then I will usually bold whatever I am emphasizing.

You bring smiles to my face, Crazy Bee!!!

[AmyJuli]

Originally Posted by HoneyBee2

Whatever do you mean?

I just mess around with the font and size. I don't know how to save the font I want as a default which means it changes because I am lazy at times and don't feel like highlighting my post and changing the font or size. Then there are times I am in a hurry and don't change it.

The reason I even fiddle the font and size is because I can be verbose and have long posts. The larger font and changing the font tend to help me be able to read others post when they are on the long side so I try to make note of that when writing a post myself.
It also helps my post not to blend in so much with my siggy. For me at least it is difficult to read some posts that are longer and if they there is not much room between the siggy and the message.
No real rhyme or reason to it unless I am posting the lists or trying to get someones attention but then I will usually bold whatever I am emphasizing.

OK, got it.

(That must have taken a long time to do. )

[2big4mysize]

love the fonting Honey bee

how about screenshots of the orginal page posted in the blog? I'm not a ranking expert but did see I think it was martin's post about each visit to the site and I know i click those wanted pictures every time I'm searching.

[Princess Dieter]

Diana, thanks for the long quote of the GOOD and BAD.

Funny how there are all these "bad" things in the "good" category. Still, that's a much more skilled apologist for Kimmer than Tippy, that's for sure.

There are, however, some examples of poor thinking, if you ask me, along with consistently casting Kimmer in the light of victim or person taking bad advice, poor dear, as opposed to the sociopath enjoying her rising glory and fan base and stoking the fires of it with the fake stories. If she's a sociopath, than the concern was feigned for selfish purposes. And since she clearly figured out ways to maximize her own profits, it was calculated, and greed was a motivation. Greed can be a motivator for hard work, which is good. But it can also be a motivator for fraud, which is bad. Let's clearly put that under the BAD, yes?

I will note this:

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.

Er, no, illogical. If Kimmer had actually gotten down to 120 pounds and maintained it for several years as claimed, she'd have many pictures she could have used as afters. The fact that she used ALL FAKES is a sign, a very strong sign, that she NEVER lost it when she said she did and NEVER maintained that loss. It would have been natural, even ego-stoking, to post her very own 120 lb Kimmer pic and boast to the world how well her plan worked. No. The fake pics say that assumption is unfounded. Sorry.

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_.

This is under the GOOD? More lies from KIMMER is under the "good" category? She resorted to fables because she didn't have a true tale to back up the persona she created at LCF--the helpful diet guru. And I would say that if the family's reports of her real character hold water--ie, scammer, user--then she created that diet-victorious, concerned counselor persona to gain power over others and to give her the basis to berate those who didn't agree with her quick-weight-loss scheme. That's what that sociopathic 8% of the population that isn't as bad as Ted Bundy do, right? Heck, you don't even have to be sociopathic. You just have to be a rather nasty character to get a kick out of internet persona creation. The feedback alone would have pumped up the ego and caused her to dedicate selflessly those hours and hours to get more ego-stoking and more power and more "followers."

(I would add that there are several stories of Kimmer "on a tear" and berating those who were "weak" and couldn't follow the plan the way she saw fit for them to. So...how unselfish she was is definitely up for debate.)

(I would also add that if it genuinely turns out that those personal facts about the foster kids, the money for their transition, the volunteering at the Braille place--oh, hang on, Bambi's story was a lie, right!?--are lies, then this is more than just someone got bad advice and overwhelmed. Let's face that, huh?)


I notice the poster ignores the medical issues posted at Kimkins Survivors and by Christin, et al. The way some realized they'd been moved into an ED mentality by the direction of Kimmer and the group bolstering the cutting back to lower levels of calories. I've seen the fitdays. They're scary.

That post at least shows a more elevated level of examining THE FACTS, as opposed to sweeping them under the rug. And I"m glad some of the follow-ups admitted that there was a general encouragement to eat at woefully low, low levels that amount to a diet no reputable doctor would recommend. I'd like to see the scientific studies that say eating 300 or 400 calories of only lean protein is good for people for weeks to months on end.

BTW, I think people can starve themselves if they want to, although one can make certain religious or ethicals arguments AGAINST such. However, when a plan sells itself as one thing (ie fast AND safe) and the founder sells herself as one thing (the epitome of the safety of losing 198 pounds in 11 months with no ill effects) and the web page promotes story after story of grand and healthy successes (that mostly prove to be false), then supporting that site and that founder is supporting fraud. If the site had said, "Yes, we're a VLCD site that promotes lower and lower calorie levels at stalls, and that we will happily encourage you into full-out anorexic behavior. Only adults, please," then no one can say they were given a bait-and-switch or a faulty deal.

But the site was based on lies, and those who object to being lied to and defrauded have every right to holler and cry for judicial intervention.

And those who like being lied to and want to make excuses for sociopathic behavior, minimizing it by comparing it to serial killers and Enron executives, well, they can do that, too. But I'm not about to stop prosecuting the person who steals my car cause, well, gee, he could have raped me instead. It's a faulty comparison.

I hope the admins allow the posts to stay up at KK. The discussion is good for the current members there. But I still say: You can do the Kimkins diet if you want; you're grown-ups and can eat any way you want. But don't do it to support Kimmer and those who abetted fraud. I get the sense that for a percentage of members, it's the support--the fellowship in the diet--that is keeping them there. Well, fellowship travels well. Why not go off and do it elsewhere in some free or even a private venue?

Supporting a sociopath at worst and just a clever nasty liar type at best...is that something you really want to do when you don't NEED to? When the whole wide world of emailing and newsgroups and private groups are out there, tools for continuing the common journey?

Support ONE ANOTHER in whatever diet lifestyle you are wedded to. Adult prerogative. But it's not good for society in general, and the more vulnerable and trusting specifically, to keep putting cash in the pockets of cons. Consider it a civic duty to Just Say No to the liar with the stretch pants on fire. It might end up preserving some person's health...and some Russian's identity.

The Princess

[Lisa46]

to Kat Wishing you healing memories of your Mom!

[Peskypict]

BlueBrook:

I have been thinking over what you have said and regardless of what you may or may not want, I am going to respond to your post.

Yes, everyone has the right to run their business website the way they want to. Why, I could run an Auto Sales site to advertise like I was selling full size cars, and actually be selling matchboxes, that is my right.

You must see however, if you purchased that matchbox, thinking it was a full size car, you have rights, as the consumer to pursue any and all actions to get your purchase price back. The women on this site basically are doing the same thing.

Now, say you have started the proceedure to get back your money and your neighbor stops by and hears your story and says, "Dudette, you bought a Rolls Royce, site unseen, for $1,200 you must have known something was up. You have to take responsibility for the fact you were taken." I'm sure that at this point the thought may go through your head, "But why am I at fault when I trusted someone online. I mean they had testimonials up from several satisfied customers. I did research on this person, they are quoted all over the auto world for their automotive expertise. Why Auto Trader had an article on them."

Then, after you request your money back you get a letter from me. "What is your issue. I gave you a Rolls Royce at the agreed upon price. Why I even paid the shipping. I'm not giving you your money back. I have hundreds of satisfied customers and I assure you that you were the first person I've ever heard any issues with. Suck it up."

Your response may be "But you're a fake and a fraud."

I then say "Speak to the hand. Oh wait, speak to my manager, Fettuchini Alfredo."

Eventually ugly vile language is exchanged....people who have never been fully involved in the situation but are friends of the Manager Fettuchini Alfredo chime in, the ten guys I gave a real car to so I could get positive feedback on my site are up in arms and chiming in, your friends, not wanting anyone else to be taken like you were are sending out emails to potential car buyers. TIS WAR!!!

Your neighbor stops by again, "Dudette, this guy has sold some legit cars, maybe you should back off. The cost of a lawyer is more than $1200, you weren't harmed, as a matter of fact, you have a new Honda you're driving that's pretty sweet."

The war continues. Heat builds.

I, to shut up the situation, decide to sell my shop and become a salesman instead of an owner. Fettuchini Alfredo is now the owner, he decides to put a block on all communications from you and to pretend nothing ever happened. If you can't communicate anymore... Hey presto!!! Problem Over.

OK, you get the point.

In the end really none of this matters. I committed the crime of fraud. I knew what your expectations were, I may have even had a Rolls Royce that was working I could have sold you, I chose to give you a matchbox car and take your money illegally. And to that end, I deserve to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, regardless of all the side chatter and name calling that went on in the process.

This is the main point that these ladies have worked dilligently and passionately for and I applaud them.

If you can't see that, I sincerely feel sad for you.

[froleena]

OK, I give up!! I can't follow along anymore. I had just finished #5 and was about to begin 6 and then couldn't get into the site.

I have homework to do and a couple of articles to write for class. I have to get on with my very boring life. I feel like I'm leaving a desperate needy addiction. I'm free! ...sort of.....I really want to know when she has to show up in court. CUDOS to Janessa and the rest of you!

PLEASE post a thread when Kimmer appears in court to answer to this fraud! YOU all are amazing! I knew one of you brillant detectives would find the Kimmer's red dress picture. WTG Bustbee...AWESOME! LMAO

Excellent work ladies and gentlemen you should all be very proud of your good work.

[Peskypict]

OMG Honeybee:

I thought it was a ransom note for a second.

IF YOU ALL DON'T STOP POSTING ABOUT ME THE SUGAR COOKIES ARE GOING TO GET IT!!!

Thanks for the laugh.

[robsrib]

Originally Posted by Peskypict

BlueBrook:

I have been thinking over what you have said and regardless of what you may or may not want, I am going to respond to your post.

Yes, everyone has the right to run their business website the way they want to. Why, I could run an Auto Sales site to advertise like I was selling full size cars, and actually be selling matchboxes, that is my right.

You must see however, if you purchased that matchbox, thinking it was a full size car, you have rights, as the consumer to pursue any and all actions to get your purchase price back. The women on this site basically are doing the same thing.

Now, say you have started the proceedure to get back your money and your neighbor stops by and hears your story and says, "Dudette, you bought a Rolls Royce, site unseen, for $1,200 you must have known something was up. You have to take responsibility for the fact you were taken." I'm sure that at this point the thought may go through your head, "But why am I at fault when I trusted someone online. I mean they had testimonials up from several satisfied customers. I did research on this person, they are quoted all over the auto world for their automotive expertise. Why Auto Trader had an article on them."

Then, after you request your money back you get a letter from me. "What is your issue. I gave you a Rolls Royce at the agreed upon price. Why I even paid the shipping. I'm not giving you your money back. I have hundreds of satisfied customers and I assure you that you were the first person I've ever hear any issues with. Suck it up."

Your response may be "But you're a fake and a fraud."

I then say "Speak to the hand. Oh wait, speak to my manager, Fettuchini Alfredo."

Eventually ugly vile language is exchanged....people who have never been fully involved in the situation but are friends of the Manager Fettuchini Alfredo chime in, the ten guys I gave a real car to so I could get positive feedback on my site are up in arms and chiming in, your friends, not wanting anyone else to be taken like you were are sending out emails to potential car buyers. TIS WAR!!!

Your neighbor stops by again, "Dudette, this guy has sold some legit cars, maybe you should back off. The cost of a lawyer is more than $1200, you weren't harmed, as a matter of fact, you have a new Honda you're driving that's pretty sweet."

The war continues. Heat builds.

I, to shut up the situation, decide to sell my shop and become a sales man instead of an owner. Fettuchini Alfredo is now the owner, he decides to put a block on all communications from you and to pretend nothing ever happened. If you can't communicate anymore... Hey presto!!! Problem Over.

OK, you get the point.

In the end really none of this matters. I committed the crime of fraud. I knew what your expectations were, I may have even had a Rolls Royce that was working I could have sold you, I chose to give you a matchbox car and take your money illegally. And to that end, I deserve to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, regardless of all the side chatter and name calling that went on in the process.

This is the main point that these ladies have worked dilligently and passionately for and I applaud them.

If you can't see that, I sincerely feel sad for you.

Beautifully written, crystal clear analogy. Thank you for taking the time to post this.

[HBGal]

Originally Posted by Katinsac

Just one thing guys...my Mother passed away tonight but I'm OK. She was 90 and not in the best of health anymore.

I'm so sorry, Kat.

[teri f]

Originally Posted by Princess Dieter

Diana, thanks for the long quote of the GOOD and BAD.

Funny how there are all these "bad" things in the "good" category. Still, that's a much more skilled apologist for Kimmer than Tippy, that's for sure.

There are, however, some examples of poor thinking, if you ask me, along with consistently casting Kimmer in the light of victim or person taking bad advice, poor dear, as opposed to the sociopath enjoying her rising glory and fan base and stoking the fires of it with the fake stories. If she's a sociopath, than the concern was feigned for selfish purposes. And since she clearly figured out ways to maximize her own profits, it was calculated and greed was a motivation. Greed can be a motivator for hard work, which is good. But it can also be a motivator for fraud, which is bad. Let's clearly put that under the BAD, yes?

I will note this:



Er, no, illogical. If Kimmer had actually gotten down to 120 pounds and maintained it for several years as claimed, she'd have many pictures she could have used as afters. The fact that she used ALL FAKES is a sign, a very strong sign, that she NEVER lost it when she said she did and NEVER maintained that loss. It would have been natural, even ego-stoking, to post her very own 120 lb Kimmer pic and boast to the world how well her plan worked. No. The fake pics say that assumption is unfounded. Sorry.



This is under the GOOD? More lies from KIMMER is under the "good" category? She resorted to fables because she didn't have a true tale to back up the persona she created at LCF--the helpful diet guru. And I would say that if the family's reports of her real character hold water--ie, scammer, user--then she created that diet-victorious, concerned counselor persona to gain power over others and to give her the basis to berate those who didn't agree with her quick-weight-loss scheme. That's what that sociopathic 8% of the population that isn't as bad as Ted Bundy do, right? Heck, you don't even have to be sociopathic. You just have to be a rather nasty character to get a kick out of internet persona creation. The feedback alone would have pumped up the ego and caused her to dedicate selflessly those hours and hours to get more ego-stoking and more power and more "followers."

(I would add that there are several stories of Kimmer "on a tear" and berating those who were "weak" and couldn't follow the plan the way she saw fit for them to. So...how unselfish she was is definitely up for debate.)

(I would also add that if it genuinely turns out that if the lies about the foster kids, the money for them, the volunteering at the Braille place--oh, hang on, Bambi's story was a lie, right!?--then this is more than just someone got bad advice and overwhelmed. Let's face that, huh?)


I notice the poster ignores the medical issues posted at Kimkins Survivors and by Christian, et al. The way some realized they'd been moved into an ED mentality by the direction of Kimmer and the group bolstering the cutting back to lower levels of calories. I've seen the fitdays. Theyr'e scary.

That post at least shows a more elevated level of examining THE FACTS, as opposed to sweeping them under the rug. And I"m glad some of the follow-ups admitted that there was a general encouragement to eat at woefully low, low levels that amount to a diet no reputable doctor would recommend. I'd like to see the scientific studies that say eating 300 or 400 calories of only lean protein is good for people for weeks to months on end.

BTW, I think people can starve themselves if they want to, although one can make certain religious or ethicals arguments AGAINST such. However, when a plan sells itself as one thing (ie fast AND safe) and the founder sells herself as one thing (the epitome of the safety of losing 198 pounds in 11 months with no ill effects) and the web page promotes story after story of grand and healthy successes (that mostly prove to be false), then supporting that site and that founder is supporting fraud. If the site had said, "Yes, we're a VLCD site that promotes lower and lower calorie levels at stalls, and that we will happily encourage you into full-out anorexic behavior. Only adults, please," then no one can say they were given a bait-and-switch or a faulty deal.

But the site was based on lies, and those who object to being lied to and defrauded have every right to holler and cry for judicial intervention.

And those who like being lied to and want to make excuses for sociopathic behavior, minimizing it by comparing it to serial killers and Enron executives, well, they can do that, too. But I'm not about to stop prosecuting the person who steals my car cause, well, gee, he could have raped me instead. It's a faulty comparison.

I hope the admins allow the posts to stay up at KK. The discussion there is good for the current members there. But I still say: You can do the Kimkins diet if you want, you're grown-ups and can eat any way you want. But don't do it to support Kimmer and those who abetted fraud. I get the sense that for a percentage of members, it's the support--the fellowship in the diet--that is keeping them there. Well, fellowship travels well. Why not go off and do it elsewhere in some free or even a private venue?

Supporting a sociopath at worst and just a clever nasty liar type at best...is that something you really want to do when you don't NEED to? When the whole wide world of emailing and newsgroups and private groups are out there, tools for continuing the common journey?

Support ONE ANOTHER in whatever diet lifestyle you are wedded to. Adult prerogative. But it's not good for society in general, and the more vulnerable and trusting specifically, to keep putting cash in the pockets of cons. Consider it a civic duty to Just Say No to the liar with the stretch pants on fire. It might end up preserving some person's health...and some Russian's identity.

The Princess

BRAVO Princess!

[Princess Dieter]

IF YOU ALL DON'T STOP POSTING ABOUT ME THE SUGAR COOKIES ARE GOING TO GET IT!!!

Whaddya mean are GONNA get it? The poor things have already been eaten ...ALIVE! It was dreadful. Pieces of devoured sugar cookies splattered all over the passenger seat.

I can't bear to imagine it.

Because, then I'll want a sugar cookie to eat, too. (And who knows what deviltry comes after that. White spandex?)

The Princess Cookie-Craving Fiend

[Peskypict]

Princess Dieter:

Excellent analogy.

BTW: I'm sending in the SCI team to find the culprit. *Gearing up the Heidi theme song from THe Who*

Whoooooooooooooo are you?



(SCI: Sugar Cookie Investigation)

[HoneyBee2]

Originally Posted by Princess Dieter

I totally am not getting Marisol. If those are the same women, I'm eating my tiara.

A Russian gal turned into Jessica Alba?!

Plus that red-shirted lady didn't have 51 pounds to lose, unless her lower legs and feet were the fat part of her, and each lost 25.5 pounds. Dang.

The Princess

Princess you have a royal way with words! Marisol did morph into Jessica Alba now didn't she. I guess that is what Kimmer meant when she said Jessica Alba was doing kimkins on other websites. I understand it now.

Oh and I am with you on the girlie in the before pic not even needing to lose 51 pounds. She looked a healthy weight in her before picture

Miss Marisol didn't lose 51 pounds...Unless the poor soul has feet that were a size 15 EEE and then they went down to a narrow size 7.
Or she good have had some lymphatic obstruction causing Lymphedema in her lower legs.
Or while doing Kimkins she lost a limb due to amputation.
That is the only way I can see her losing that much weight.
But I bet she isn't a success story what do you think? :::wink wink:::

[BlueBrooke]

Originally Posted by JuliaL

I don't care who Ducky is because s/he never claimed to have lost 200 lbs.
I don't care who Ducky is because s/he doesn't charge me money to join his/her site.
I don't care who Ducky is because s/he isn't lying, cheating and stealing from vulnerable people who just want to lose weight and be healthy.

If you don't know who Ducky is, you can't say any of those things honestly.

[wifezilla]

Quote:

<