Intimidation....I Will Not Be Silenced

[alebrewer]

It just seems to me that accusing an AMC (or anyone else for that matter) of engaging in slavery - especially on a forum like LinkedIn - is just asking to be shunned...

 

[bluechip]

It just seems to me that accusing an AMC (or anyone else for that matter) of engaging in slavery - especially on a forum like LinkedIn - is just asking to be shunned...

I can understand the AMC I criticized taking offense and wanting nothing to do with me. That's their choice. What I still find troubling is a completely separate AMC taking action over comments that had nothing whatsoever to do with them. That's the distinction I'm making.

 

[alebrewer]

I can understand the AMC I criticized taking offense and wanting nothing to do with me. That's their choice. What I still find troubling is a completely separate AMC taking action over comments that had nothing whatsoever to do with them. That's the distinction I'm making.

Yep - I think we all understand that. And the point I'm making is that - regardless of who the comment was leveled at - the comment itself may, or may not, have expressed a bias or belief that is not consistent with the ethics that another AMC purports to maintain. And one way of upholding a particular ethos is to ensure the vendors you are associated with hold a similar ethos.

 

[CGinMN]

OP, you keep moving goalposts. You went from “I am not your slave and you will not silence me” to “I’m just asking how they became involved.”

Why is it hard for appraisers to understand comprehend ethics, and is this a bad sign?

 

[bluechip]

OP, you keep moving goalposts. You went from “I am not your slave and you will not silence me” to “I’m just asking how they became involved.”

Why is it hard for appraisers to understand comprehend ethics, and is this a bad sign?

No goalposts moved. My position from the beginning has been that I viewed the letter as intimidation and I will not be silenced by an AMC. The discussion then naturally raised the question of why an entirely separate AMC became involved in comments that had nothing to do with them. Both things can be true at the same time.

And questioning my understanding of ethics because I'm asking that question is unnecessary. If you disagree with me, fine. Address the issue instead of taking shots at my competence.

 

[chad hampton]

I wonder if there are any appraisers named Luigi?

 

[bluechip]

I wonder if there are any appraisers named Luigi?

Should I change my name to Luca?

 

[CGinMN]

It’s been addressed here ad nauseam. You think it’s an intimidation tactic rather than just following internal policies and procedures after they became aware of your post. So yeah, I think your ethics have a blindspot.


And now you’re joking about assassination as some type of remedy. Good call.

 

[bluechip]

It’s been addressed here ad nauseam. You think it’s an intimidation tactic rather than just following internal policies and procedures after they became aware of your post. So yeah, I think your ethics have a blindspot.

View attachment 111173
And now you’re joking about assassination as some type of remedy. Good call.

Good grief. God forbid anyone recognize sarcasm. Nobody is advocating assassination as a “remedy,” and suggesting otherwise is ridiculous. As for my ethics, disagreeing with your interpretation of an AMC's actions doesn't constitute an ethical blind spot. You think they were simply following procedure. I think their involvement in a matter concerning another AMC deserves scrutiny. We disagree. It really is that simple.

 

[Mark K]

What caught my attention is WHY. One AMC taking action against an appraiser over comments made about another AMC raises questions that, in my opinion, are worth asking.

Maybe because of your unprofessional conduct in regard to another company? They are probably thinking "how long until this nutjob says the same thing about us". They'd be stupid to NOT remove you.

Instead of spending so much time defending your actions here, I'd be preparing for a summons for slander by CC.