Dave Mendoza is een blogger. Op zijn blog Six Degrees from Dave schrijft hij meestal honingzoete interviews, want iedereen is great en wonderful in de wereld van Mendoza. Tot een week geleden. Toen verscheen er op zijn blog een artikel over Irina Shamaeva, en voor dit stukje heeft Mendoza zijn pen in vitriool gedoopt. De essentie van zijn rant is dat deze mevrouw Shamaeva zich ongegeneerd, ten koste van anderen, op de voorgrond dringt om zichzelf te promoten.
Niet zo netjes van deze mevrouw Shamaeva als het verhaal klopt; maar het feit dat juist Mendoza deze kritiek denkt te mogen uiten maakt hem tot een hypocriet. Want diezelfde Mendoza heeft in 2008 het vertrouwen van zakenpartners beschaamd door zijn eigen clubje te promoten via misbruik van e-mail adressen uit de LinkedIn groep van diezelfde zakenpartners. Dus leek het me goed hem in een reactie op zijn artikel daarop te wijzen.
Dave Mendoza is a blogger. On his blog, Six Degrees from Dave, he writes mostly sugarcoated interviews, because everyone is great and wonderful in Mendoza’s world. Until a week ago. When an article about Irina Shamaeva appeared on his blog, and for this piece Mendoza has dipped his pen in vitriol. The essence of his rant is that this Mrs. Shamaeva shamelessly and at the expense of others, puts herself in the foreground to promote herself.
.
Not t00 nice of this lady Shamaeva if the story is true; but the very fact that Mendoza thinks he can express this criticism makes him a hypocrite. Because in 2008 this same Mendoza violated the trust of business partners and embarrassed them by promoting his own club through abuse of e-mail addresses from the LinkedIn group of those same business partners. So it seemed like a good idea to point this out to him in a comment to his article.
Helaas kreeg ik onderstaande reactie niet geplaatst:
For someone who has (ab)used the administrator’s rights of a LinkedIn group, not being his own group, for sending spam to push his own services and as a result losing his LinkedIn profile for life, you seem to be the last person to be calling Irina self-serving. What completely hypocritical behavior!
I don’t know Irina but I do know Dave Mendoza. And from reading this blog posting, the two seem eerily similar in terms of behavior…
Mendoza wil namelijk geen kritiek op zijn blog; dus filtert hij reacties. Vreemd genoeg is hij er gek op om vervolgens via een e-mail te gaan flamen:
For someone who has no iota of intelligence on what actually transpired to create the conditions you mention I feel obliged to educate you simply. It is always best to know facts as opposed to assumptions.
The FACT and none self-serving, is that I had to make a decision as to whether to continue to serve my members with their support and their request to have a linkedin top ten versus that of stopping the founding purpose of the group. I chose better not to proceed at all with Linkedin than to stop the reason I created the group – to feature those without resources to connect with their audience.
As for self promoting my servivces that to is either mean spirited or a malicious lie because I never once served my business. In fact, if you even know what my deliverable is and can compare to an email feel free to educate me.
The issue of which you were not present, among several – is that Irina literally went up to the stage and grabbed the micropphone from the presenters hand and stoof for 5 minutes discussing her business and a totally irrelevant discussion than specifically told people to seek her services.
I have been to Amsterdam some 3 x and I am well aware of your grumpy reputation but it doesn’t reflect well on me to judge you when we have not met, as well you are unwise to make such complelet uneducated assumptions none of which is true
and no, none of the descriptions are similar. Find me someone who says I got on stage uninvited to talk about my business and then we can discuss.
If your hatred is about my giving my own contacts away then I am guilty, but that is not the reason you despise me as to attack me.
Your voice has more credence in the land of wind mills.
Best to you and family Marc.
Bijzonder sympathiek om mij en mijn familie in the land of wind mills de beste wensen te verstrekken. Maar Mendoza was nog niet klaar, want een paar minuten later plofte het volgende mailtje in mijn virtuele brievenbus:
(ab)used the administrator’s rights of a LinkedIn group, What administrator rights are you suggesting? What? not being his own group. How am I not my own group? What the hell are you talking about? I honestly do not know. My emails were outside of Linkedin and were sent via an opt-in list for my group through my site. Again, please know facts before you try to burn someone’s house with that torch Marc
Tja, dat vraagt om een reactie, die ik hem dan ook prompt stuurde (de namen van personen en de betreffende LinkedIn groep zijn geanonimiseerd):
Trying to play innocent won’t fly with me. I’m referring to the LinkedIn group [groepnaam] of [persoonsnaam 1] en [persoonsnaam 2] where you were the group manager and abused that privilege to send me and other self-serving e-mail.
The fact that you block responses that are not flattering to your person on your blog is laughable.
I will write a piece on RecruitmentMatters on the level of your hypocrisy and will show you for who you really are. It will also be translated in English. And on my blogs all responses are visible.
Deze reactie raakt blijkbaar een zenuw; want vervolgens vindt Mendoza het nodig om een enorme hoeveelheid vuil te spuiten over de personen die ik in mijn e-mail noem:
You mean the two gentlemen that had failed in representing [congresnaam] with low attendance and how [persoonsnaam 1] had his car towed in front of attendees?
Oh yes, I see – and I created that group and I was promised shares by [persoonsnaam 1] and I have email trails that show my conception of many of the 2.0 aspects and I was never compensated for it. As I recall [persoonsnaam 1] was terminated from employment and lost his case against [persoonsnaam 3] did he not?
Again Marc, I think you have better things to consider
Seriously Marc I think you should ask [persoonsnaam 1] what happened to his group idea since when [persoonsnaam 2] who was not privy to the olanning than took the event on his own from the other three moderators with a lie sent to Linkedin. Again I suggest walking away because I have emails that prove every single thing I have said and it will find you being foolish.
I have no animus towards you best to walk separate paths.
Again their is no comparison between what I discuss of Irina in which an audience witnessed and what you think you believe through third parties
Mendoza denkt blijkbaar dat hij door anderen zwart te maken er zelf schoner uit komt te zien…
Helaas voor Mendoza gaat het hier niet om informatie through third parties maar om twee zaken die objectief zijn vast te stellen:
- Mendoza heeft (onder meer naar mij) spam gestuurd naar e-mail adressen waar hij uitsluitend toegang toe had omdat hij administrator rechten had voor een LinkedIn group van zijn zakenpartners. Mendoza voerde bepaalde activiteiten uit voor deze LinkedIn group maar was niet de eigenaar van die group.
- Het account van Mendoza en alles wat daarmee samenhing is mede op grond van rapportage van dit misbruik door LinkedIn afgesloten. En Mendoza had toendertijd een zeer uitgebreid LinkedIn netwerk opgebouwd.
1. Misbruik van e-mail adressen
Hier is het allemaal mee begonnen; en ik was mede het slachtoffer van een spamactie van Mendoza waarbij hij gebruik maakte van e-mail adressen waar hij beschikking toe had. Die e-mail adressen hingen namelijk samen met een LinkedIn groep waar Mendoza administrator rechten had; de groep was echter niet van hem maar van zakenpartners die met Mendoza hadden afgesproken dat hij bepaalde activiteiten zou uitvoeren. Tenslotte was Mendoza een ervaren en intensieve LinkedIn gebruiker.
Maar Mendoza bedacht dat hij diezelfde e-mail adressen ook tot eigen voordeel kon benutten. En stuurde onbeschaamd een mail met de uitnodiging om lid te worden van zijn groepje op RecruitingBlogs: Dave Mendoza has invited you to join Six Degrees on RecruitingBlogs.com.
En dat is spam. Maar niet volgens Mendoza:
it is merely an invite to join a group. Your standard of spam is not the legal standard we hold in the USA. I was not selling anything I was inviting you to join of which you declined.
De arme man is duidelijk in de war. Waarbij hij denkt dat Nederland in de VS ligt. Waardoor zijn legal standard van spam ook voor Nederland geldt. Ach, het zij hem vergeven. De meeste Amerikanen schijnen niet te weten waar Nederland ligt, alleen dat er windmolens te vinden zijn.
Maar goed, toen ik deze spam van hem ontving heb ik per direct een van de eigenaren van de LinkedIn group om opheldering gevraagd en aangegeven dat ik door ene Mendoza werd gespamd. Waarop ik vervolgens het volgende mailtje van Mendoza kreeg:
I received word that somehow you joined [groepsnaam] and received SixDegrees email – which is strnage because I do no solicitations for the other group, it reached 10,000 organically. Once someone joins SixDegrees BY REQUEST only they receive membership requirements. I wonder if perhaps you inadvertantly also joined sixdegrees? Otherwise I am confused because I do keep them separate.
In any case, help me understand teh process so I can see if there was an error in process. Thank you for helping with the [groepsnaam] effort, I can assure you we have no interest in spamming or infringing upon membership as we grow it. We just started the group initiative two days ago, your suggestions can help us avoid such errors my friend
Een volstrekt onwaarachtige reactie van iemand die probeert zijn misbruik van e-mail adressen te maskeren. Ik heb hem dan ook kort van repliek gediend:
I didn’t subscribe to anything from Six degrees and the unsolicited e-mail came at exactly the same moment as the [LinkedIn groepsnaam] e-mail confirmation. The unsolicited e-mail I received is added below. To me this is spam and should be avoided at all times.
Dat was wat mij betreft meteen het einde van mijn communicatie met Mendoza. Ik heb hem genoteerd op mijn zwarte lijst.
Maar ook hier lijkt Mendoza een andere voorstelling van zaken te hebben. Hij stelt namelijk in een van zijn vele reacties van vorige week het volgende:
There was no solicitation of my business. Six Degrees is networking for the group of which I did not get compensated. Your issue was regarding spam of which as you stated I apologized and you accepted two years ago
Ik weet niet welke soort Engels Mendoza spreekt, maar zijn reactie was geen excuus en mijn reactie was, mutatis mutandis, geen acceptatie van enig (niet bestaand) excuus. De man leeft in Lalaland…
2. LinkedIn account afgesloten
Mendoza ontkent dat hij door LinkedIn is buiten gesloten:
Marc to prove your theory wrong I left Linkedin in September 2008. The issue you mention was in July 2008. Two months difference.
Wat hij hiermee denkt te bewijzen is mij volstrekt duister, maar de zinsnede I left LinkedIn suggereert dat Mendoza zelf het initiatief heeft genomen. Niets minder dan een poging tot het herschrijven van een stukje ongewenste geschiedenis.
Bedenk hierbij dat Mendoza een recruiter/sourcer is voor wie een LinkedIn netwerk natuurlijk een enorme waarde vertegenwoordigd. En dat zijn LinkedIn netwerk ook zeer uitgebreid was. Welke recruiter zou daar ooit vrijwillig afstand van doen? Correct, geen enkele recruiter! Behalve Mendoza…
Vervolg
Ik heb in het tijdsbestek van enkele uren in totaal 8 e-mails van Mendoza ontvangen, waarbij zijn toon steeds harder en dreigender wordt; onder meer uitmondend in het volgende:
Again if you do proceed to attack me in public it will embrace legal defamation because you have access to truth and you refuse to listen or read of it.
Correct; ik heb zowel toegang tot de truth according to Mendoza als de echte waarheid. Ik heb hem daarom als volgt geantwoord:
Your dishonorable e-mails have backfired because they show a man without any scruples trying to smear others in trying to clear himself. That, in my book, is the act of someone trying to hide something. Trying to bully me with legal action will not work either. Because with the evidence at hand I wish you all the succes in the world in trying to build a legal case. I will be waiting in anticipation. If you need the phone number of my legal counsel I’m more than happy to provide it at your request.
Slotopmerking
Wat begon als een (tegengehouden) reactie op een vilein blog van Mendoza op zijn site heeft dankzij zijn eigen arrogantie en leugens tot deze blog posting geleid. Had hij de reactie geplaatst, dan had hij (en anderen) daarop kunnen reageren. In plaats daarvan heeft Mendoza getracht ongewenste feedback te blokkeren. Bijzonder dom voor iemand die toch zou moeten weten hoe social media werkt.
Unfortunately I could not post the following response:
For someone who has (ab)used the administrator’s rights of a LinkedIn group, not being his own group, for sending spam to push his own services and as a result losing his LinkedIn profile for life, you seem to be the last person to be calling Irina self-serving. What completely hypocritical behavior!
I don’t know Irina but I do know Dave Mendoza. And from reading this blog posting, the two seem eerily similar in terms of behavior…
Since Mendoza does not want criticism on his blog, he filters out comments. Strangely enough, he then starts flaming via an e-mail:
For someone who has no iota of intelligence on what actually transpired to create the conditions you mention I feel obliged to educate you simply. It is always best to know facts as opposed to assumptions.
The FACT and none self-serving, is that I had to make a decision as to whether to continue to serve my members with their support and their request to have a linkedin top ten versus that of stopping the founding purpose of the group. I chose better not to proceed at all with Linkedin than to stop the reason I created the group – to feature those without resources to connect with their audience.
As for self promoting my servivces that to is either mean spirited or a malicious lie because I never once served my business. In fact, if you even know what my deliverable is and can compare to an email feel free to educate me.
The issue of which you were not present, among several – is that Irina literally went up to the stage and grabbed the micropphone from the presenters hand and stoof for 5 minutes discussing her business and a totally irrelevant discussion than specifically told people to seek her services.
I have been to Amsterdam some 3 x and I am well aware of your grumpy reputation but it doesn’t reflect well on me to judge you when we have not met, as well you are unwise to make such complelet uneducated assumptions none of which is true
and no, none of the descriptions are similar. Find me someone who says I got on stage uninvited to talk about my business and then we can discuss.
If your hatred is about my giving my own contacts away then I am guilty, but that is not the reason you despise me as to attack me.
Your voice has more credence in the land of wind mills.
Best to you and family Marc.
Particularly nice of him to send best wishes to me and my family in the land of windmills. But Mendoza was not yet done, as a few minutes later the following email arrived in my virtual mailbox:
(ab)used the administrator’s rights of a LinkedIn group, What administrator rights are you suggesting? What? not being his own group. How am I not my own group? What the hell are you talking about? I honestly do not know. My emails were outside of Linkedin and were sent via an opt-in list for my group through my site. Again, please know facts before you try to burn someone’s house with that torch Marc
Well, that requires a response, which I also promptly sent him (the names of individuals and the group on LinkedIn are anonymized):
Trying to play innocent won’t fly with me. I’m referring to the LinkedIn group [group name] of [person's name 1] and [person's name 2] where you were the group manager and abused that privilege to send me and other self-serving e-mail.
The fact that you block responses that are not flattering to your person on your blog is laughable.
I will write a piece on RecruitmentMatters on the level of your hypocrisy and will show you for who you really are. It will also be translated in English. And on my blogs all responses are visible.
This reply apparently touched a nerve, because then Mendoza finds it necessary to talk a lot of trash about the people I mention in my e-mail:
You mean the two gentlemen that had failed in representing [conference name] with low attendance and how [ person's name 1] had his car towed in front of attendees?
Oh yes, I see – and I created that group and I was promised shares by [person's name 1] and I have email trails that show my conception of many of the 2.0 aspects and I was never compensated for it. As I recall [person's name 1] was terminated from employment and lost his case against [person's name 3] did he not?
Again Marc, I think you have better things to consider
Seriously Marc I think you should ask [person's name 1] what happened to his group idea since when [person's name 2] who was not privy to the olanning than took the event on his own from the other three moderators with a lie sent to Linkedin. Again I suggest walking away because I have emails that prove every single thing I have said and it will find you being foolish.
I have no animus towards you best to walk separate paths.
Again their is no comparison between what I discuss of Irina in which an audience witnessed and what you think you believe through third parties
Mendoza apparently thinks that by making others look shady he will make himself look cleaner…
Unfortunately for Mendoza, this is not about information through third parties but about two things that can be verified objectively:
- Mendoza has (to among others, me) sent spam to e-mail addresses to which he had access only because he had administrator rights to a LinkedIn group of his business partners. Mendoza performed some activities for this LinkedIn group but was not the owner of that group.
- Mendoza’s account and all that was linked to it was, partly on the basis of reports of this abuse, terminated by LinkedIn. And Mendoza at the time had build up a very extensive LinkedIn network.
1. Abuse of e-mail addresses
That is how it all started, and I was one of the victims of a spam operation of Mendoza where he used e-mail addresses that he had access to. Those e-mail addresses were linked to a LinkedIn group to which Mendoza had administrator rights; however the group was not his but belonged to his business partners who had agreed with Mendoza that he would carry out certain activities. After all, Mendoza was an experienced and intensive LinkedIn user.
But Mendoza thought that he could use the same e-mail addresses to his own advantage. And shamelessly sent an e-mail with an invitation to join his group on RecruitingBlogs: Dave Mendoza has invited to join Six Degrees on RecruitingBlogs.com.
And that is spam. But not according to Mendoza:
it is merely an invite to join a group. Your standard of spam is not the legal standard we hold in the USA. I was not selling anything I was inviting you to join of which you declined.
The poor man is clearly confused. He seems to think that the Netherlands are situated within the US. Which makes his legal standard for spams also count in the Netherlands. Ah, forgive him. Most Americans don’t seem to know where the Netherlands is, only that windmills can be found there.
Anyway, when I received this spam from him, I immediately asked one of the owners of the LinkedIn group for clarification and indicated that I was spammed by a certain Mendoza. And subsequently I got the following e-mail from Mendoza:
I received word that somehow you joined [group name] and received SixDegrees email – which is strnage because I do no solicitations for the other group, it reached 10,000 organically. Once someone joins SixDegrees BY REQUEST only they receive membership requirements. I wonder if perhaps you inadvertantly also joined sixdegrees? Otherwise I am confused because I do keep them separate.
In any case, help me understand teh process so I can see if there was an error in process. Thank you for helping with the [group name] effort, I can assure you we have no interest in spamming or infringing upon membership as we grow it. We just started the group initiative two days ago, your suggestions can help us avoid such errors my friend
A totally untruthful response from someone who tries to mask his abuse of e-mail addresses. So I sent him a brief reply:
I didn’t subscribe to anything from Six degrees and the unsolicited e-mail came at exactly the same moment as the [LinkedIn group name] e-mail confirmation. The unsolicited e-mail I received is added below. To me this is spam and should be avoided at all times.
As far as I was concerned, that was enough for me to immediately end my communication with Mendoza. I have added him on my blacklist.
But here too Mendoza seems to have another interpretation of things. He states, in one of his many comments last week that:
There was no solicitation of my business. Six Degrees is networking for the group of which I did not get compensated. Your issue was regarding spam of which as you stated I apologized and you accepted two years ago
I do not know what kind of English Mendoza speaks, but his reaction was no excuse and my reaction was, mutatis mutandis, no acceptance of any (nonexistent) excuse. The man lives in Lalaland …
2. LinkedIn account terminated
Mendoza denies that he is banned by LinkedIn:
Marc to prove your theory wrong I left Linkedin in September 2008. The issue you mention was in July 2008. Two months difference.
What he’s thinking to prove with this is totally unclear to me, but the phrase I left LinkedIn suggests that Mendoza took the initiative himself. Nothing less than an attempt to rewrite a piece of unwanted history.
Keep in mind that Mendoza is a recruiter/sourcer for whom a LinkedIn network obviously represents a huge value. And that his LinkedIn network was also very extensive. Which recruiter would ever voluntarily renounce this? Right, no recruiter! Besides Mendoza …
Sequel
Over a period of a couple of hours I have received a total of 8 emails from Mendoza, his tone becoming more aggressive and threatening with each one; among others this resulted in the following:
Again if you do proceed to attack me in public it will embrace legal defamation because you have access to truth and you refuse to listen or read of it.
Correct: I have both access to the truth according to Mendoza as well as the real truth. And thus I replied to him as follows:
Your dishonorable e-mails have backfired because they show a man without any scruples trying to smear others in trying to clear himself. That, in my book, is the act of someone trying to hide something. Trying to bully me with legal action will not work either. Because with the evidence at hand I wish you all the success in the world in trying to build a legal case. I will be waiting in anticipation. If you need the phone number of my legal counsel I’m more than happy to provide it at your request.
Final Note
What started as a (halted) comment to a venomous blog from Mendoza on his site has, thanks to his own arrogance and lies, led to this blog posting. Had he posted the comment, then he (and others) would have had an opportunity to respond. Instead, Mendoza tried to block unwanted feedback. Particularly stupid for someone who should know how social media works.
Gewoon effe om te teasen he Marc, maar je moet moet met hem eens zijn dat de twee (mensen vragen lid te worden van een groep versus een podium “bumrushen”) twee heel verschillende dingen zijn.
Zijn vertrek bij Linkedin en de case rondom de group switch is stuff of legends. Volgens mij was hij slechts luis in de pels van de toen nog grotendeels onontgonnen social media etiquette. Wat ik er van weet, en dat is weinig, heeft hij slechts geprobeerd leden te pushen lid te worden van een andere groep. Schoonheidsfout, check, smakeloos naar mijn standaarden, check. Echter totaal niet te vergelijken met het hijacken van een congres om direct sales te doen.
Dus ondanks het feit dat Dave er een wat smakeloos Amerikaans communicatie model op nahoudt in social media en je daar wat van moet kunnen zeggen open eenblog, is hem meteen aanvallen als ware hij de grootste oplichter sinds Marc Ernst (lol) zwaar overtrokken. Zeker van de man die op RIDE straks ongetwijfeld de award wint voor “botste recruitment criticus”.
Neem van mij aan dat deze Mendoza heel wat meer op zijn kerfstok heeft dan alleen het spammen van LinkedIn group leden.
Ik val hem niet aan, ik laat zien hoe hij acteert en dat hij daarmee zich op een vergelijkbare manier gedraagt als iemand waarvan hij claimt dat zij selfserving is. Zoals gezegd ik ken de dame niet en daar zijn overigens zeer verschillende interpretaties over
You state “I do not know Irina… but I do know Dave Mendoza” – and yet by your own admittance we have never met, you received a single email from me TWO YEARS AGO – and it was not as I can substantiate any relation to my services, nor of any economic value. It was to join recruiting blogs networking group for six degrees.
That is the primary falsehood. In the United States I met all the anti-spam provisions by identifying who I am, having a means of response and I was not selling any services or goods. I understand your criteria in Holland differs. In this case if you and your readers believe that substantiates you “know me” or my character having never met, and your source of hatred being a single ‘offending email” so be it. Not everyone can like another, albeit you hate someone 7,000 miles away because he essentially invited you to network
Now that I clarified my offense to you, you abuse truth to suggest a similarity to Irina’s situation. The difference is clear – I was calling her out because for two years she would subtletly attack a friend and what she considers a competitor. She likewise uses comments to link to her services and mentions her products in her comments at varying times. Moreover in her attempt to undermine his shared information in the post – she is caught to be incorrect by other commentators when they try her method.
What is the similarity in this Marc? She sold, I did not. She piggy backed on his post to promote herself – I invited you to network. She directly names her competitor in a post since and lied that she never took training from him. I did not – I always give due credit.
[persoonsnaam] moreover substantiated my response and you chose not to copy and paste his response to you. I stated clearly [persoonsnaam] and I are no longer associates and even so, despite the lack of friendship he essentially defended me to your attacks by email which further undermines your argument.
So you are angry at me because I told someone it was wrong to use other’s posts to share knowledge – for the express purpose of promoting their commercial services whereas you have a two year animus because I invited you to join a networking group.
I see.
We never met, we had one email to the point of your attacks initiating and you lie and say “you know me”
I see. It’s fairly transparent.
If a puppy dog licks you in the face one playfully and it offends you, will you wait two years to write about that? Will you compare that incident to the story in the paper of a pitbull mauling a small child and leaving its business brochure on the body?
I believe my anecdote is more compelling and more accurate.
I love the Netherlands and its people and yes esp its windmills – since somehow you consider that an insult, but I saw that on a brochure as well. I also trained recruiters in your country and I have then and since remarked that within Europe that sense of entrepreneurial spirit and desire to be kept up to date on practices is a characteristic that the Dutch and Americans share.
I don’t know you Marc, perhaps you are a kind man despite what I hear about you from your country men. They are rumors and speculation. I see a bad temper and quickness to judge yes, but I am sure you have other qualities like the very nice user interface of your site. My accolades with all due seriousness. In any case, I will try you to consider your hateful abuse of my person as an exception. To your readers, again judge for yourself: the original ere link and my own post were both a DEFENSE of Sourcing and its culture against someone’s attempt to malign the other. Marc fails to mention this to make it look like I was attacking someone. what I in effect I did that honored my colleagues in defending a peer from the abuses of another(s)
That is objective truth Marc.
Let’s mention one last example: Apparently Marc believes that Irina’s on video spectacle of grabbing a microphone from a colleague as he presents to hundred+ audience to promote herself and her business and to discuss a completely irrelevant topic – is good manners. If he doesn’t believe me he can look at the ERE video and not depend on my word. The proof is in moving pictures. If he thinks I failed myself by not defending therefore SEVERAL PEERS than what can I say.
Can you say, as you know me so well that I ever rudely grabbed a microphone to sell my services and to change the topic entirely and stand in front of another’s audiennce? No I don’t believe you can.
Instead Marc made this mean spirited, hateful malignment of my person all due to a single email which essentially invited him to shake hands and have a tea and cookies. he calls that services. I suppose if kindness and invitation to get to know someone is a service to him because the concept is foreign to him. Based on my experience it was not an experience common to his countrymen who have always been kind and inviting.
I raise my cup to your fictional writing skills Marc.
Please do not kick any small children or butterflies for any offenses, perceived or real this week.
Life is two short to have such incredible hatred bottled up for two years.
A big bear hug to you Marc, I know how offensive that should be to you. Best regards
Soms hoef je niets meer toe te voegen aan een reactie.
Overigens heb ik een naam uit bovenstaande reactie verwijderd omdat andere personen niet met name dienen te worden genoemd.
Jammer dat je enkel reageert vanuit de titel “admin”.
Wees eens netjes en doe eens reageren
Heb je naar aanleiding van zijn reactie, Mendoza een email gestuurd?
Als dat zo is…zeg maar dag tegen je eigen normen en waarden
+kudos voor Mendoza
Als je persoonsnamen uit een reactie verwijderd en tegelijkertijd een reactie typt kan het voorkomen dat je onder admin reageert. Ingewikkelder is het niet en zoals je kan zien is dat ondertussen dus ook gecorrigeert. Met dank voor de tip.
En waar heb je het over met e-mail en normen en waarden?
PS: I will show you the exact copy of the original invite 2 years ago that makes Marc stay up at night and wondering where he can find nails to crucify me and plotted for 24 months to do so:
NOTICE: No selling of services. No self promotion – it is for networking.
I am unsure it is spam when I invite him to join a networking group but not when RCE sends him the same type of invite? Do you?
Moreover the offense concerning Linkedin is a complete and unrelated matter and I won’t bother to debate it but I can assure you that that is the most glaring lie. To put it simply, as one of the top ten largest networker accounts at the time it was because they were against my top ten lists in which persons requested or were asked to be part of to have my contacts – which I essentially gave away – invite each other. I didn’t make money doing this for these people, they shaked my hand in person at an onsite location and I specifically asked each and everyone who participated to understand the request. I have proof but why bother? LOL
Marc is so full of self importance he believes my issues with Linkedin were about him? Linkedin is against open networking. I am for open networking. Fine hate me Marc. Don’t disagree, just hate me for difference of opinion. I give my contacts away for free because in my heart I want people to connect that I know could benefit within my staffing industry, linkedin doesn’t like that. To Marc it vindicates his theory that I murdered bunny rabbits on easter.
FOR YOUR WITNESS, THE EVIDENCE OF MY “OFFENSE”:
Van: Dave Mendoza [mailto:invitations@recruitingblogs.com]
Verzonden: vrijdag 6 juni 2008 15:02
Aan: marcdrees@planet.nl
Onderwerp: Come join me on Six Degrees on RecruitingBlogs.com…
RecruitingBlogs.com
The Social Network For The Recruiting Industry
Dave Mendoza
Dave Mendoza has invited you to join Six Degrees on RecruitingBlogs.com
Join 8,000. Learn sourcing tips, job opportunities, Web 2.0 Recruiting. Largest interactive community for best practices & thought leadership. click http://www.recruitingblogs.com/group/sixdegrees
Site Domain Home: sixdegreesfromdave.com A focus group of fellow evangelists who value the development of building Passive Talent Relationships as a means of enhancing Best Practices, Meeting Pipeline demands, and building value in community.
634 members
2 discussions
50 comments
Created By: Dave Mendoza
Check out Six Degrees on RecruitingBlogs.com:
Isn’t it great. You can respond to a blog posting without anyone trying to block you. Just like social media should be.
And it is not the content of the e-mail, it is the simple fact that you abused the trust of partners and used their e-mails to peddle your own services. Thereby spamming people. It’s not more complicated than that.
Actually again you are either willingly ignorant or you chose one story rather than address that the person whose name you gently choose not to use agreed with my interpretation and I find it hilarious that since it doesn’t fit your storyline you fail to post it.
Neither of the two you state are business partners had those email addresses. In fact of some 8k to 10k emails in Europe they contributed 100 and yours was not one of them. So how can I “use their emails to peddle my services” when:
1) One I had your email they (who you call business partners???How was that?) did not contribute it. I can prove this handidly as I had your email in my email system catalogued. Neither of the gentleman had it, in fact I have proof I was teh one asked to send from my system. But of course you assume. I stated in my response to taht email two years ago that yes it was strange you received it because I split the lists and you should not have been on it and apologized TWO YEARS ago for the simple technical error.
I ALSO SENT YOU the email to join RCE. How can that ve a violation when I had your email before and after and neither so-called business partner had it to begin with nor the email system to send it? Again, prove me wrong. You can assume but I had the system it was physically impossible for them to send it to you from each of their desktops. It’s called campaigner and neither had it.
2) I did NOT solicit and you are like a broken letter I displayed the email and no one could agree with your psychosis that it is selling anything. It has NOTHING to do with how I earn a living. I have helped some hundreds build their own networks without a dime.
And I find it funny that you SPECULATE AND ASSUME on why I am not on Linkedin. You lied to me in your email that you would wait until you would confirm the reason with Linkedin but of course you failed to. And you never once asked for my voluminous proof when I offered it.
Asking now would be rather fruitless since you attack me without ONE SHRED of evidence confirming anything. You attack me as a hypocrite when the person I called out in my post had LITERALLY mentioned her business, her website, and her webinars for sale within a string of comments to a post that was meant to help others. She attacked it as incorrrect then gives a sample that was incorrect.
Your malignant attempt to call me hypocrite fails on every count to find a parallel
And again, you never answer to your LIE that you know me. We have never met, and in fact in my records I actually praised your site in 2007 if I recall for its look and feel
But the lil child in you Marc is so scarred I invited you to what is equal to a party invite. Your neighbors must find you scary when it comes to the holiday season. Do you send angry threats to senders of christmas cards because you didn’t specifically ask for them? Do you call them spammers for filling your mail box with seasons greetings?
When you get an invite to join a book reading club that doesn’t charge members do you call them spammers and then send a letter to eveyone in the neighborhood that that person is evil and a hypocrite when that neighbor stops someone down the street because she used a baseball bat to beat someone in the community>
It is the same exact logic all as stated.
So do you tell people we walked holding hands in the Rivera and talked about college days when you are discussing one email before you attacked me as … KNOWING ME?
Your credibility is in shreds Marc.
So i want thank you. You did me a great service today now that your readers have seen you malign someone for defending the staffing industry. That is exactly what you are doing. Anyone can see the post that offends you on my site and on ERE to compare and I am 100 PERCENT certain anyone with ethics would agree with me.
If someone robs a bank or an old lady do you also attack the witnesses or the prosecutor on your site? No difference.
I regret nothing in what I stated on my post because the facts are entirely available to everyone and with video proof.
You offered not one shred of evidence to equate my behavior with Irina’s. Not one. You are just a hateful person who let a two year invite to network vile your digestive system Mark.
You say I threatened you which is hilarious. I told you the obvious that knowingly posting information you have reasonable capacity to acquire to review to ascertain your facts or to knowingly lie to destroy one’s reputation is a legal offense. It isn’t a threat, its a standard.
You failed to check with any sources other than people with very checkered pasts, or one person by what you yourself stated – a person who wanted to own the group and whose emails verify self serving interests. I have those emails as well but you refused my rational response to look further. You never validated why I am not on Linkedin. You never called me like a gentleman would to ask questions. You decided to hate me. Period.
A man of honor does not decide to attempt to destroy a reputation on assumptions. You never once tried to find the facts 7000 miles away.
The odds are 99% that you will not have enough information to make a sound judgment but judge you did.
Shame on you Marc Drees
@Dave:
Your long and rambling responses keep on missing the key points that I put forward in my article thereby actually proving my points over and over again. A word of advice: stop digging a hole for yourself and address the issues at hand. But considering your apparently completely unique outlook on the world this advice will also miss its purpose.
To reiterate:
You attack a person on your blog while you have used the same tactics for similar purposes. At the same time you do not allow dissenting comments on your blog, thereby essentially blocking any response that is not welcome although it would probably allow the person and others to comment on your opinion.
This, together with the fact that you went on an e-mail spree to me to ‘prove’ me wrong and in the process proved my point over and over again was for me the reason to write this article.
There is no shame on me. The shame is completely on you and nobody else. The judgement and hate you keep on rambling about does not exist. I simply wanted to post a comment on your blog since I considered your posting hypocritical in the light of past events. The rest is history and here for all to read and draw their own conclusions.
Ik wacht een beetje op de volgende boodschap:
‘Admin – topic closed’
Mischien maar verder via telefoon, fax of e-mail?
Ik zou er niet op rekenen.
Je hebt er in ieder geval weer een gezellige penvriend bijgekregen
Hahaha, daar zat ik echt om verlegen…
Marc
Did you ever stop and think your own blog is proof of self promotion? You think your your opinion is so gratifying that to pillory me is like zeus making a proclaiation. But than you can retot that I am a hypocrite because I blog – oh yes, but for your readers unaware my blog FEATURES UNKOWNS to discus their tribulations and learnings in the staffing industry – and yet you mock that as well.
You see in my blog my reputation is beong famous for making other people famous. The “other people” who never had the spot light.
Now I am being rhetorical not literal and not posing judgment on other blogs but to your mocking for doing yet another self less action to benefit others.
”
To reiterate Why you are completely wrong and simply bullying, you state:
“You attack a person on your blog while you have used the same tactics for similar purposes. ”
You have not proven how I promote my services when the agreed upon offending email from two years ago sells no services, does not promote me but networking
1) Irina used another person’s instructional email (as she has for at least 2 years) to piggy back and diminish his post and promote with direct hyperkinks to her own and to promote a paid webinar. CHECK – No Similarity.
2) She Took the microphone from a presenter and likewise stood at front of an audience to go on for at least 5 minutes about herself, never addressed the topic at hand and then directed people literally to her blog and instructional webinars. CHECK – I NEVER did this or anything close to similar.
3) I was addressing her after two years of this behavior – attacking fellow colleagues to promote her PAID SERVICES. I was DEFENDING someone who had been attacked by her. CHECK – No Similarity by addressing her wrong I was doing a kindness to her peers she had attacked to begin with.
4) Your so called comment wasn’t something to be discussed it was a pure vitriolic insult. I chose the class act to ignore it because in contrast to an opportunity to debate something you simply called me names.
5) You are a liar, you lied that you know me. you lied that you were going to confirm with linkedin corp – but did didn’t with corp nor did you confirm with anyone. You assume. Other than with someone I understand, perhaps incorrectly but recall – you had a business relationship with or worked on a project together with. Alan. Moroever to show what a lightweight you are, I can just as easily source seeing 75% to 85% of all linkedin profiles using search engines – more than what can be viewed depending on connections. Perhaps Irina can give you lessons Marc? LOL
Other than believing your unoriginal mentionables are so important worth broadcasting – can you possibly compare how many people I have helped? 500+ and counting – building their networks who prior did not experience networking. Not a service a kindness. Not compensated by anything than smiling I did something for someone else. Attack it – but answer what have you done for others, on any large scale. You? Other than fostering hostility and pretending you know me?
Marc thank you, sincerely for allowing your readers to see who you really are moreover thank you for the compliment of thinking me so infamous you could feed traffic using my personae. The highest compliment – now people can see my blog … is about other people and giving THEM an opportunity to be noticed.
I called someone out because they attacked colleagues – you attack because it shoots pleasure up your leg I suspect.
I think it humorous as well you never posted the so-called fantasy business partner I had as you mentioned – who emailed you in CC to defend me in your attacks.
It saddens me sincerely because I would have enjoyed sharing coffee on my next visit Marc, but so many people tell me of your boorish behavior and having insulted me without confirming your facts makes that generally impossible.
Enjoy kicking puppies and yelling at rainbows Marc
@Dave:
While I’m all for free speech I need to warn you that your ramblings are doing nobody any harm but yourself. You seem to have no ability to focus at the core issue, instead you go on and on to prove points that nobody addressed but yourself. I’m completely comfortable if you choose to continue with this self-destructive behavior but it seems pretty pointless to me. And at least I have warned you against doing this.
Oh, and just for my sake, please contact your former business partner for an update…
Kaas, iemand?
alleen met Zaanse mosterd
Actually Marc – you are rambling. You haven’t proven how I sold my services, period. I showed proof unlike you of the ‘offending’ email – and no service nor promotion of my business is evident.
Likewise the person who claims being a former business partner according to him was no business partner, according to him I was doing him a favor because I never received any compensation whatsover, you can prove otherwise because if he did that would be an entertaining conversation and we can discuss shares.
You made my point. The one source is a person who in several emails I can post begged to take control of the group and was upset because I released him as a moderator to a general member instead because he let a ‘chef’ into the group for recruiters.
The other person you do not mention actually confirmed this email.
Marc you are a compulsive liar of this I am now sure. Next response I am happy to post that person’s email to educate you unless you already are and simply decided to be malicious in stating falsehoods.
Let me now when you wish to apologize like a gentelman
@Dave:
Again, digging a deeper whole, but feel free to continue. And I invite you to post your ‘proof’. It will be highly educational, of that I’m sure.
Like I said point me Marc to one single promotion of my services or business interests in the email which made you burst into a fit two years ago of which you have yet to heal. ZERO. Nothing. Not one dime nor one aspect of my model other than giving away help
Van: Dave Mendoza [mailto:invitations@recruitingblogs.com]
Verzonden: vrijdag 6 juni 2008 15:02
Aan: marcdrees@planet.nl
Onderwerp: Come join me on Six Degrees on RecruitingBlogs.com…
RecruitingBlogs.com
The Social Network For The Recruiting Industry
Dave Mendoza
Dave Mendoza has invited you to join Six Degrees on RecruitingBlogs.com
Join 8,000. Learn sourcing tips, job opportunities, Web 2.0 Recruiting. Largest interactive community for best practices & thought leadership. click http://www.recruitingblogs.com/group/sixdegrees
Site Domain Home: sixdegreesfromdave.com A focus group of fellow evangelists who value the development of building Passive Talent Relationships as a means of enhancing Best Practices, Meeting Pipeline demands, and building value in community.
634 members
2 discussions
50 comments
Created By: Dave Mendoza
Check out Six Degrees on RecruitingBlogs.com:
reply
Read more: http://recruitmentmatters.nl/2010/09/02/aan-de-schandpaal-dave-mendoza/?lang=en#ixzz0yWAO88GM
@Dave:
As you clearly have trouble reading, let me reiterate the key point once again:
You have abused e-mail addresses from a LinkedIn group (not being your own group) to send unsolicited e-mail (a.k.a. spam). That the content of your spam was about free services is absolutely irrelevant and therefore misses the point. It is the fact that with your spam action you showed the same kind of self-serving behavior that you recently accused Irina of doing.
Reiterating the content of your spam isn’t serving you any purpose other than reiterating the irrelevant point your are trying to make. From where I stand the hole you have dug for yourself is now so deep I can hardly see you at the bottom. Let me know if I can fill it up.
Na mijn bovenstaande reactie koos Mendoza ervoor om via e-mail de conversatie voort te zetten. Waarbij hij een tweetal e-mails uit de doos tovert die voor hem het ‘bewijs’ zijn dat hij blank als pas gevallen sneeuw is in de situatie die ik daarmee dus onjuist zou hebben beschreven. Helaas bieden geen van de twee e-mail enig bewijs, maar ik ben er zo langzamerhand van overtuigd dat Mendoza dat zelf ook wel weet. Helaas doet hij wederom een poging de reputatie van een ander te bezoedelen om er zelf beter uit te springen.
Ik geef hem daarom het volgende antwoord:
Having a selective memory or cherry picking e-mails still doesn’t change the fact of your willful abuse of e-mail addresses that were entrusted to you. The e-mail below as well as the LinkedIn response in your previous e-mail does not prove anything. And how do you come up with the idea that [persoonsnaam] has anything to do with it? I haven’t had any contact with the guy for over two years now. Your constant attempts to pin all kinds of blame on anybody but yourself is both immature and disingenuous. I have your spam and the fact you are banned for life from LinkedIn. That is more than enough.
I have better things to do than to repeatedly educate you on truth, honesty and transparancy as it clearly falls on deaf ears. Therefore it’s better to call your bluff. You mentioned in multiple e-mails you would be forced to seek legal action if I would pursue in publishing your shenanigans. Well I did publish your shenanigans but I didn’t see any legal action so far. So what’s holding you back? Because rest assured, in a legal case the truth will be visible for all to see. Something I would certainly welcome.
However, if you don’t press charges, you are not only the self-serving person I described in my blog posting but you are also fully aware of this fact. In that case, stop trying to convince me or anybody else that you have acted anything but self-serving. It will only make matters worse for you.
En dat zorgt voor de volgende reactie van Mendoza:
I think we are finished. I enjoyed that not a single person supported you as stated
Thanks for exposing yourself. Again “`our willful abuse of e-mail addresses that were entrusted to you” – you are simply full of yourself because you willfully ignore your email was not entrusted to me by anyone. It was an email in my system. I showed you email that [persoonsnaam] himself apologized for unprofessional behavior. You will not listen to logic if it bit your weak chin off.
Even if I were to have used an email that wasn’t mine that has no similarity to Irina. You fail to see the group was (A) my creation, (2) your email was mine not given to me, (3) did not support my business interests in any way. A jack hammer would fail to knock that truth into your head. I defend people in my industry – you attack them, you proved that, thanks
The debate is finished. I have become bored of you
Marc, enjoy your week and kick someone else
STOP CONTACTING ME. DO NOT SPAM ME.
De laatste zin is werkelijk hilarisch! Dit is de man die spam heeft gestuurd, geen tegengeluid op zijn eigen blog toestaat en vervolgens mij gaat bestoken met e-mails op basis van een niet geplaatst tegengeluid…
Verder is het interessant dat de man de daad dus inderdaad niet bij het woord durft te voegen. Duidelijker kan hij het niet maken, zo lijkt me…