Re: This post will be closed for commenting very s... - Page 6

Sheilaray · ‎03-10-2010

@ROMARY wrote:
'Gee', I really don't know why (the controversy) ........... She seemed to be a very nice, knowledgeable host. The models liked her, etc. She didn't state anything controversial, imo. Well, I'm hoping that she is doing well.

By all her own accounts, she is doing very well. Here is where the controversy comes in: She has absolute control over her business, how she wants to run it and will ban anyone who dares to make a suggestion or is disappointed and expresses it. She encourages a mob mentality where her "Tribe" can also go on the attack and she supports it. For someone who has put herself in the public eye most of her life, it seems that she can't and won't deal with the least bit of critique. I have personally read some of her responses and they are childish, extremely unprofessional and rude. JMHO.

SusieQ_2 · ‎03-27-2012

@Sheilaray wrote:
@ROMARY wrote:
'Gee', I really don't know why (the controversy) ........... She seemed to be a very nice, knowledgeable host. The models liked her, etc. She didn't state anything controversial, imo. Well, I'm hoping that she is doing well.
By all her own accounts, she is doing very well. Here is where the controversy comes in: She has absolute control over her business, how she wants to run it and will ban anyone who dares to make a suggestion or is disappointed and expresses it. She encourages a mob mentality where her "Tribe" can also go on the attack and she supports it. For someone who has put herself in the public eye most of her life, it seems that she can't and won't deal with the least bit of critique. I have personally read some of her responses and they are childish, extremely unprofessional and rude. JMHO.

Based on what evidence? Where can these childish, extremely unprofessional and rude comments be seen? I'd love to read them.

silentgirl · ‎08-19-2016

I think it's important, that anyone be careful of accusing another of "lying" when in fact, the accuser has no way of proving intent -

Sheilaray · ‎03-10-2010

@SusieQ_2, goodness they are all over her Facebook page which is open. I can only imagine what is said on the secret invite only Tribe page.

dooBdoo · ‎06-27-2010

Sheilaray wrote:
ROMARY 1 wrote:
'Gee', I really don't know why (the controversy) ........... She seemed to be a very nice, knowledgeable host. The models liked her, etc. She didn't state anything controversial, imo. Well, I'm hoping that she is doing well.

By all her own accounts, she is doing very well. Here is where the controversy comes in: She has absolute control over her business, how she wants to run it and will ban anyone who dares to make a suggestion or is disappointed and expresses it. She encourages a mob mentality where her "Tribe" can also go on the attack and she supports it. For someone who has put herself in the public eye most of her life, it seems that she can't and won't deal with the least bit of critique. I have personally read some of her responses and they are childish, extremely unprofessional and rude. JMHO.

I've only seen some of her responses that came under criticism, but based on those it's my feeling that her use of sarcasm isn't especially beneficial. There's a misconception that sarcasm is witty and light, but in truth it doesn't always come across that way. It's not really clever or difficult to use and can translate as passive-aggressive cheap shots. "Humorous barbs" can cause people to recoil.

The definition of sarcasm is "the use of irony to mock or convey contempt." Synonyms are derision, mockery, ridicule, scorn, sneering, scoffing, and the etymology means "to tear flesh." Now, this is just my take... but if a vendor responded to me that way, I'd take my business elsewhere.

Few things reveal your intellect and your generosity of spirit—the parallel powers of your heart and mind—better than how you give feedback.~Maria Popova

Noel7 · ‎03-09-2010

@Sheilaray wrote:
@ROMARY wrote:
'Gee', I really don't know why (the controversy) ........... She seemed to be a very nice, knowledgeable host. The models liked her, etc. She didn't state anything controversial, imo. Well, I'm hoping that she is doing well.
By all her own accounts, she is doing very well. Here is where the controversy comes in: She has absolute control over her business, how she wants to run it and will ban anyone who dares to make a suggestion or is disappointed and expresses it. She encourages a mob mentality where her "Tribe" can also go on the attack and she supports it. For someone who has put herself in the public eye most of her life, it seems that she can't and won't deal with the least bit of critique. I have personally read some of her responses and they are childish, extremely unprofessional and rude. JMHO.

*******************

@Sheilaray

She has absolute control over her business? You do realize, I hope, that's a good thing. Otherwise, she would soon be out of business.

JaneMarple · ‎05-23-2011

It's a shame that the first LR thread was poofed because if it wasn't for the name calling, it would still be open. Many posters here have mentioned the same things about Lisa and her followers, so why the nastiness? If anyone doesn't like the comments about LR then don't open the threads.

You Don't Own Me- Leslie Gore
(You don't Know) How Glad I Am- Nancy Wilson

SusieQ_2 · ‎03-27-2012

@Sheilaray wrote:
@SusieQ_2, goodness they are all over her Facebook page which is open. I can only imagine what is said on the secret invite only Tribe page.

@Sheilaray, I read her Facebook and haven't seen her being any of the things you suggested. Please give us the quotes, and tell us where they are. Surely, if they are all over her Facebook you can point them out.

Noel7 · ‎03-09-2010

@Sheilaray wrote:
@SusieQ_2, goodness they are all over her Facebook page which is open. I can only imagine what is said on the secret invite only Tribe page.

********************

It's sad that so many women love to tear down other women, especially successful women.

Sheilaray · ‎03-10-2010

@Noel7 yes I realize that and that's why I said it. It obvious that this is what Lisa wanted after her 20 years of "working somewhere else" (as she states). The problem is that she will not validate all of her disappointed shoppers, will not increase her inventory due to demand or create a shopping experience where people can shop anytime and not have to worry about their carts being empty when they go to check out. She has control over all of that yet refuses to make the changes needed for customer satisfaction. Which is fine if she doesn't want to grow the business and merely wants it for a vehicle in which she can travel and write it off.