Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Bel's thoughts

PreviousPage 53 of 54Next
Quote from Bel on March 8, 2023, 11:40 am

From the perspective of "planted information" though, the concept that information obtained surreptitiously is "more believed" still applies.

Yes, absolutely.

It was an example to show and remind that you always want to be open to the possibility it's a trick / planted information, but that a lot of times, it's also a pure and simple mistake -or just pure unawareness, as it was probably the case here and the guy didn't even realize the text sub-communicated low power-.

Quote from Kavalier on March 8, 2023, 1:50 pm
Man, this is genius advice!! It deserves to be in PU. PU lists a similar manipulation technique under Drama & nagging, but the principle here is different, as it's used not so much to nudge people into action, but to distract them from the main course of action.

Yes, and great .

It's indeed the same principle PU files under relationship power dynamics / manipulations.
And it's because, from what I've experienced at least, it's a lot more common there (to stay streamlined PU doesn't always repeat the same principle even though it may apply to other realms of life and socialization, albeit in this case indeed it may be worth a mention).

And man, your colleague, wow, what a great piece of work :S.

Really also shows the other side of the coin:

More people with the power awareness and the strength to stand up to manipulation and power moves are crucial to make this a properly functioning word -or improve it-.
She pulled an incredible power move, but it also required him to at least NOT be a strong, self-confident and power-aware man.

Kavalier and Bel have reacted to this post.
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

This is an update on the situation mentioned in the first post of this thread, but since it deals with a nasty situation I prefer to bury it here in my journal.

The first client (mentioned in the first post of that thread) decided to go forward with the donation in front of the notary, after the tax calculation was corrected and reduced on my prompt.

I sent documents for the deed to the assistant of the notary, and asked to receive the text of deed in advance. The assistant, however, sent the text directly to the client (and not to me). The client still forwarded it to me, and I gave green light.

Then, when we got in front of the notary for the deed, the notary tried to position himself as "better knowledgeable" than me in front of my client. I however intervened, and checked this by asking some questions in law of which I already knew the answers.

After the deed was done, the whole thing left a strange feeling in me.

So, the day after, I went online and searched the notary - and, I immediately found out he has been sentenced in the recent past for tax crimes.

Now I'm thinking that:

  • there is a possibility that the "mistakenly increased tax calculation" might not have been a mistake;
  • there is a possibility that the "reluctance" of the assistant to speak with me may have been due to other reasons than her being "shamed" by my "not correctly power-protecting".

I then ultimately strongly advised the client to change notary for any future deeds.

Lucio Buffalmano and Kavalier have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoKavalier

If you could please sign this quote as acknowledgment you have "taken vision"...

I accompanied Bella to a dental clinic today.

I had found it by walking in front of it and had entered to ask for information (our usual dentist was not available at this time, and Bella was in some mild dental pain).

They explained me how they worked and told me the first visit would be totally free.

So, I later accompanied Bella there, and she had this "first visit".

The doctor (she later told me) suggested a course of action to resolve the pain, but also suggested several other unrelated things that felt like he wanted to "cash in" as much as possible.

Then Bella came out to the waiting room, and the secretary printed out a price quote for the suggested dental works, and explained it to her in front of me.

At the end, the secretary said to Bella:

Secretary: If you could please sign a copy of this price quote to acknowledge you have "taken vision".

At this point, I immediately feel something is off, but don't say anything.

Bella signs.

The secretary makes a xerox and handles it to Bella, then puts the original in a folder behind her.

We get out. I ask Bella to see a copy of the price quote.

And, sure enough, above Bella's signature these words are printed: "IN ACCEPTANCE".

Now: I have seen, in my work, enough cases of people who were asked to sign stuff "just to acknowledge receipt", and later had been told they had agreed to the quote, and had been asked to pay.

I say to Bella I'm going to go back in.

We re-enter the clinic, and this exchange ensues with the secretary:

Me: Hi again. Sorry, but this paper says "in acceptance" above the signature, while you asked for a signature to acknowledge having "taken vision".

Secretary: Yes, but it's only to confirm receipt. You are not bound to pay this until you decide to go on.

Me: We did not accept any price quote. Will you please handle the original of this paper back to me.

Secretary: Of course. Here it is. (she turns around, gets the original from the folder and handles it to me)

Me: Thank you. Goodbye.

Secretary: Goodbye.

I have to say I was surprised by the secretary's abrupt turn-around after her initial token-resistance.

Which, of course, proved my initial point.

And, that Bella now needs to find another dentist.

Lucio Buffalmano and John Freeman have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJohn Freeman

Thanks for sharing!

A free visit at the dentist seems definitely fishy to me, indeed.

I think you handled it well by requesting the original document to prevent dishonesty on their side.

Very scammy dentist office!

Lucio Buffalmano, Jack and Bel have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJackBel

The importance of balance in using names, last names and titles while writing 

Referring to my previous post concerning Christmas cards.

[I had sent wishes cards to clients and:

- on the envelopes, I had included my job title “Att.” before my full name;

- while indicating the addressees on the front of the envelope with their full name only, no job title, to save time;

- inside, on the cards, I had signed with my full name (no title) while referring to them either by first name (in case I was “friends” with them) or by their job title and last name (in case the relationship was more formal).

One client then mirrored back what I had done by sending me a wishes card in response (where he wrote my name without title on the envelope, and included his job title as sender).]

Now I’ve come across, by chance, several LinkedIn posts where people where discussing a similar dynamic.

Turns out that many people tend to interpret this kind of behavior (ie signing with a job title while referring to the addressee by name) as a grave social offense.

This makes me better understand that the way I compiled envelopes was a definite mistake.

Also, I realize that the actual cards where also somewhat unbalanced in that sometimes I referred to clients by first name only, while signing with my name and surname (even if I didn’t include “attorney” there).

In other words, I was alienating clients (again!) with not understanding this dynamic.

So from now on I’ll definitely:

- mirror the way sender and addressee are written on envelopes for my Christmas cards (ie either job title for both, or just name and surname for both);

- and also mirror my signature inside with the way I refer to the addressee (ie if I say “Dear James”, no signing with my name and surname, but just my name “Bel”).

As an additional note: I suspect that

- addressing the recipient with name and surname, and then signing myself name only (ie Bel)

- or, as I did in some of the cards, addressing the recipient by job title and signing just with my full name

may be still okay, as the “social balance” would then be in the recipient’s favor.

Lucio Buffalmano and Kavalier have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoKavalier

If that's helpful: my approach to finding professionals is to ask people I trust and/or professionals in the same professions or similar ones a recommendation.

Lucio Buffalmano, Kavalier and Bel have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoKavalierBel

That dentist, talking about "pull approaches" and making customers want to come back (not :).

Have you tried Googling them?
It's a step I often take and look up the reviews -maybe someone even mentioned they were forced to pay-.

About signing with "attorney" when you called them by name, I agree -I think we mentioned back in the days-.
And I also think there's a power move example in PU of a woman using the string of her "titles" in her email signature. Stuck in person and just the same in email. So just to avoid one may have the wrong ideas, either you go formal both for you and them, or keep it informal.

John Freeman, Kavalier and Bel have reacted to this post.
John FreemanKavalierBel
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Thank you John, Lucio.

One recent catalyst of change for me is now seeing things from the “other side”: it’s happening that someone says or writes something to me and I feel something, and then think “I used to do that, but now that I am on the other side I realize it was wrong for this, this and this reason”.

It’s also happening that I think of changing my behavior with respect to what I used to do, and then ask myself “What is the reason for this change?”. This makes me realize the change is due to unconsciously wanting to convey something (eg less warmth, more distance, some displeasure).

The long preamble is to say that I recently thought of sending birthday wishes to a relative by writing something like “Sending you my wishes…”, and I instantly realized that writing “sending” was meant to convey distance on my side.

This, in turn, made me think that writing “Sending you my best Christmas wishes” to clients is probably not very good: it conveys the wrong thing, ie wanting to keep distance and possibly treating wishes as a formality instead of a chance to deepen the relationship.

So I think from now on I will also change the tone of the content of my wishes cards to something more personal and simple, ie “Dear X, many wishes for a Merry Christmas and a happy new year”.

Lucio Buffalmano, Alexandr and 2 other users have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoAlexandrJohn FreemanKavalier

Women IOI: backwards glance on the street

This is something I remember encountering in two different times of my life:

  • many years ago, when I was very muscular due to going to the gym every day (but unable to approach);
  • and now (and I'm not much muscular now, so it's definitely the effect of Power University! or maybe me just starting to free some mental space with respect to abuse and power moves and noticing more of what surrounds me).

I only realize the meaning of this IOI now though.

The IOI is: woman walking alongside you on the street, and immediately after passing you (thus getting ahead of you) she tilts her head and looks sideways in your direction.

She is not looking sideways, she is signaling interest by looking in your direction.

In case one is interested and not already paired up, best thing to do IMO is just go:

Hi! [extend hand and say name]

She has already signaled interest, no matter what one says it's going to be good.

Lucio Buffalmano and John Freeman have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJohn Freeman

Nice observation, Bel!

I hope that Bella doesn't casually peruse TPM's forum 🙂

John Freeman and Bel have reacted to this post.
John FreemanBel
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?
PreviousPage 53 of 54Next