The Voice of the Readers – No. 12

test-6

test-61

Advertisements

8 Comments

  1. Allow me to make a correction to my comment. I would never speak on your behalf, but rather I would express my own opinion regarding the situation in support of your work. If I were so inclined. I’m not even sure why I mentioned it other than I found it annoying.

  2. Congratulations on another glowing testimonial to your newfound benevolency.

    Where might I find the testimonials as to your malevolency? Which Letter(s) to the Narcissist where written to you by any of your many victims? Those are the letters I would like to read next. In the interest of fairness and full disclosure shouldn’t any potential clients have the benefit of both in order to fully gauge in what area you excel?

    How are your victims, by the way? Have they healed and moved on with their lives? I have no doubt you thoroughly decimated them and took great pride in doing so.

    1. Comments such as these do entertain me.

      1. Thank you.
      2. Hmm, where indeed. How about all the admitted instances in the many articles many of which contain the responses and reactions of my victims? Was I wrong to think that you would have read all of those, after all you did write on 27th June 2019
      “Your work does speak for itself and you are an excellent writer. I appreciate your succinct style of communication. Where I was once simply horrified by what I had read, I continued to read. Now I find myself simultaneously amused and entertained, as well as informed on a very complex subject to a degree that I have been unable to find anywhere else. I am now an addicted reader. My first addiction to a narcissist.”
      So, either you have
      a. Read my work but have forgotten the content;
      b. Read my work but have chosen to forget that you have in order to comment as you have done so in order to try to provoke, making a baiting comment when you already know the answer; or
      c. You have not read as extensively as you claimed to have done so.
      Either way, the ‘testimonials to my malevolency’ are throughout this place.
      3. Again, if you had read extensively you would be aware that none of the Letters to the Narcissists are from my victims, they are for the readers to have a voice where they have hitherto been denied one.
      4. Do you really care one wonders or do you pretend to care for the purposes of a further attempt to provoke. I do not know the precise situation of each of my victims at this given moment. Some appear to have moved forward but one suspects they have not done so as much as claimed, others have made some form of recovery (others better than others) and some have not. Why would I only reduce them by a tenth by the way?

      1. I am glad I can entertain you, psychopath. I imagine your life is not very fun. I also imagine it is the same entertaining feeling I get when I read your colorful clever articles about your childish remorseless dick-like behavior.
        1) Your welcome
        2) I was not looking for your version of what they said and did. I have read many of your articles but your work is quite extensive. I need no reminder about comments I have made.
        a) I have not forgotten the content.
        b) It was more of a challenge than a provocation. There is a distinct and subtle difference. Perhaps I was too hasty in my comment attesting to your brilliance.
        c) Again, I have read much of your work and will continue to do so. The testimonials in your work come only from you. Testifying to both your brilliance as well as your efficacy in abuse and manipulation. Strangely enough, I believe you are accurate, but your victims still have not been heard.
        3) I am aware. It is a pity you don’t afford your own victims the same consideration.
        4) I care about your victims. Past, present and future. How is your latest acquisition by the way? Shield Maiden? Have you devalued her yet? Will you tell your faithful followers when you do?
        As to your final question, only you can answer that. Perhaps it was an error on your part and you should view it as a personal failure.

        1. Your imagination is evidently limited then. Thank you for the ad hominem observation which demonstrate a complete lack of substance. Interesting how you are entertained by my ‘childish remorseless dick-like behaviour’. So you find this entertaining yet claim to care for my victims – somewhat incongruous, still that does not surprise me.

          1. “You’re”.
          2. You did not state that. You needed a reminder of what you had written to highlight that your approach lacks evidence. Something you have underlined again through your response.
          a. You evidently had.
          b. Backtracking now you have been shown up through the production of evidence.
          c. Testimonials only come from me? Who do you think comments on this blog? Who do you think e-mails me with thanks and appreciation.
          3. Is it a pity? Matters not to me.
          4. She is excellent well thank you very much. Your envy is palpable. No she has not been devalued, there is no need.
          5. As to my final question. You stated that I had ‘decimated’ my victims. To decimate means to reduce by a tenth, hence why I asked the question. Your response is nonsensical. You state (erroneously) that I have reduced my victim’s by a tenth, I ask you ‘why would I do that’ (I do not confirm that I did that) and you respond as if the 10% reduction is a fact. That does not even make sense. What you have done is sought to deflect from your embarrassment at having used the incorrect word in your original question and in so doing, you have made yourself look worse. There would have been nothing wrong by responding ‘Decimate was the wrong word, I meant crush or destroy.’ Instead you try to mask your error by making it a fact, when it is not and then attempt to infer some failing on my part, when the failing is yours. Let’s see if you can be honest and accept you were wrong or will you come back with another deflection?

          1. I am away on business and will reply to your detailed comment when I return in a few days. Lest you think I have nothing more to say, I assure you I do.

          2. So consistently clever you are, Englishman. Perhaps that’s the part I like about you. I believe what you meant to say was I would say little of what you want to hear.
            Perhaps my imagination regarding you is limited. I don’t know if you experience ‘fun’. You have said you do not experience ‘joy’, so I assumed you do not experience ‘fun’. Perhaps you could enlighten me about this.
            There is no incongruity concerning my feelings. I am disgusted by your behavior; educated and entertained by your articles; and empathetic toward your victims. I even feel empathy toward you.
            1) Thank you for that necessary correction. Now proofread your own articles and make all the necessary corrections within them. Be sure not to devalue your office staff afterward. If you like I will notify you of mistakes as I find them on an individual basis.
            2) Your work speaks for itself. It is comprehensive and seemingly accurate. I have not seen any complaints regarding your treatment of clients for your services, although perhaps they exist. I have seen you respond both patiently and impatiently toward your blog commenters. I would refer clients to your website. I am undecided at this point if I would refer clients to your services which require a direct interaction. As you are acutely aware, victims of abuse are in a fragile emotional state. I take my referrals very seriously. I will continue to read.
            3) Yes, it is a pity. Of course, it is of no concern to you. Let this be a reminder to your blog readers, and a warning to any potential clients.
            4) I am glad to read in your improperly punctuated statement that the shield maiden is well. I don’t wish for your relationship with her to fail. If it fails it will mean another woman has been abused. I am not envious of you in any way. I have my own strengths and accomplishments and am secure enough that I can acknowledge you for yours. I am glad she has not been devalued. I hope your success in this endeavor provides you with the necessary fuel so that you will never feel the need to devalue her.
            5) As to your final statement, it was no mistake. I enjoy words. I chose the word ‘decimated’ specifically due to its association with war. I notice a theme throughout your articles in the words you often use; treasonous, treachery, disloyalty. It seems you view the world as a battleground and you are always at war with it and the people around you and I assume as well, with yourself. You apparently are a traditionalist with regard to the meaning of the word. I used it for its more modern definition of ‘to destroy a large percentage of’. You did not completely destroy your victims. As far as I know they are still alive, and I hope they find the strength to live again.
            You are correct that my statement was somewhat nonsensical. It was not a deflection. Consider it a ‘frustration’ that I applied to you. My version of a ‘word salad’. Judging by your rambling response to it, I would say it was successful.
            I believe you should be the number one source for information on narcissists and it is only a matter of time before you are.
            I notice many words, that I am now familiar with; super empath, empathic supernova, low range, mid-range, greater narcissist etc. I believe these terms originated from you? As I am sure you are aware, they are being used throughout YouTube without the proper credit being given to you. I disapprove of this in that (1) you deserve the credit for your work; (2) this reflects very poorly on these other ‘professionals’, and (3) it will translate into ineffectiveness to the victim clients as they are given these terms without the necessary knowledge and understanding to back it up. I might consider speaking up about this on your behalf in the near future as I become more familiar with your work.

Vent Your Spleen!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.