Why "Brass-Knuckles Reputation Management" Fails

It’s not because it’s a foolish tactic, even though it’s a very foolish tactic.

It’s not because a person isn’t actually a good person, even though he isn’t actually a good person.

It’s much, much simpler than that.

It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you’ll do things differently.

Warren Buffett

A good reputation is hard to build and easy to lose. Once lost it is even more difficult to rebuild. It can be done, but there are certain things that must be done. They are not optional.

Responsibility – if you want your good name back, you must take full ownership of your bad acts. No blaming others, no quibbles, no arguments. “I robbed that bank.”

Apology – any effort at rehabilitating a reputation is incomplete and useless without this. A sincere apology has four parts: admission of wrongdoing, recognition of the repercussions, a request for forgiveness and acceptance of responsibility.
A. “I robbed that bank.”
B. “I know it was wrong to rob that bank.”
C. “Please forgive me for robbing that bank.”
D. “I know I should go to jail for robbing that bank.”

Restitution – if you can’t or won’t accept responsibility for things you have done, if you can’t or won’t apologize and seek forgiveness for what you have done, then making restitution is certain to be a bridge too far. If you can’t at least make an effort to pay for or to undo the damage you’ve inflicted, you’re lost.

What I find interesting is the way that people generally fall on either side of a line dividing those who understand and accept these concepts are fact, and those who reject them. And once divided, they tend to self-reinforce.

People will expend enormous energy defending bad people, and then wonder why others think they are also bad people. They will routinely refuse to consider that they have done something wrong, preferring instead to think that their reputations have been ruined by others reminding people of the truth about them.

These people would be worthy of pity if they were not so clearly misguided.

Like(0)Dislike(0)

Author: Paul Krendler

The Thinking Man’s Zombie

26 thoughts on “Why "Brass-Knuckles Reputation Management" Fails”

  1. Are you referring to our friend chasing down every mention of himself on twitter telling people to leave him alone? Not @s, mind you, but discussions not involving him?

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
    1. Oh, definitely not! He obviously wants be be left alone. He seems to be facing a challenge in that. I don't want to be among those responsible for causing him not to succeed.

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
      1. He'd find more solace if he wasn't purposely searching twitter for the dreaded use of his name. That's the only way he would have seen it, short of following McCain, which in itself brings it's own set of issues...

        That and once again getting smacked on the nose by Ken White.

        Like(0)Dislike(0)
    2. There are a lot of euphemisms I would, and have, chosen to reference various cyberthugs (there's one right there!), but "friend" isn't one of them. Very clever of you to choose it so as to truly mask your subject, Perry Mason! hahaha

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
  2. Jack, oops, I mean, Paul, check the "retribution" paragraph for typos. Also, do you mean "restitution" instead "retribution"?

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
  3. He's complaining about being followed by "trolls" is what's preventing him from doing whatever he says he want's to do. So what does he do last nite, out of nowhere he tries to out-snark his buddy Popehat, hilarity ensued.

    WHY WON'T THEY LEAVE ME ALONE AFTER I SAY SOMETHING STUPID TO THEM!?!?!?!?

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
  4. Page master - if I post multiple links in a post, will it be held in moderation? I drafted a post earlier, but would rather you personally review it before it's public.

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
    1. Moderation defaults are set. Everyone goes to moderation until I approve one comment by them, and any comment with two or more links also goes to moderation. That second is a general spam-prevention measure.

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
      1. Dear Zombie Manners,

        Would it be a new low, or just an average low, for a person to use the occasion of his ex-in-law's death as an opportunity to attack his ex (at least two decades after the divorce), and to also attack his own children with said ex, while the now adult children are mourning their lost grandparent? This person went so far as to deny paternity of one of the mourning children in his latest rant.

        Does it make a difference if that person attacking his ex and his own children also claims to be mourning the same death, despite it being someone they've likely had no contact with in decades? You know, because everything that goes on really is about this person, a true narcissistic, despite the lack of familial ties, or any contact over the last decades.

        So, should flowers be sent directly to the narcissist? Or a donation made to the his favorite charity? Can I make a donation to my favorite charity instead? Should condolences be offered to the deceased's offspring? What about condolences to the deceased's grandchildren? Or should condolences only be offered to the narcissist because of the offense the others caused the narcissist?

        One more thing it's probably important to note - the narcissist is a stage eleventy PD patient; meaning, of course, Personality Disordered.

        Signed,
        Not wondering why his own children want nothing to do with him

        Like(0)Dislike(0)
  5. He's trying to use word games to avoid taking responsibility for the reprehensible incident of the woman he threatened. He points to his exact words and notes that he "never threatened to take her children." Oh, very well. He actually threatened to have a woman's children taken from her. A nit barely worth picking. (And Popehat phrased it correctly. Bill argued against words Ken never said.)

    I think his last line of defense in this is his insistence that he never had the power or authority to either take her kids or have them taken. This is completely irrelevant to the issue of whether he threatened her. If I put a gun to Bill's head and say I'll shoot him if he doesn't give me his wallet, the fact that the gun isn't loaded doesn't mean I didn't rob him. The threat happened.

    He doesn't understand that it was the threat itself, with all the emotional anguish it evoked in the poor woman, that we find so despicable. Bill is acquainted with anguish, like the evening he spent petrified that Patrick Grady had filed criminal charges against him. Or the day he cowered in fear that I had paid the airfare of a violent felon to visit him. But he is incapable of empathizing with a woman who suffered far worse anguish because of his threat. Just like he is incapable of empathizing with the gut-wrenching torment he inflicted on Mrs Stranahan.

    I commend him for his decision to "move on", but that doesn't mean his misdeeds are forgotten, or may never be mentioned. If he insists on searching for his name and popping in to offer weasel worded defenses to his foul past actions, then I submit that he hasn't really "moved on" at all.

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
    1. I forgot to mention something.

      When you are threatening someone, adding the words "this is not a threat" doesn't change the fact that it's a threat. It just makes you look foolish"

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
  6. Anyone else enjoy how he declares "Block" like he's he Zeus bringing the lightning bolt?
    Occassionally you get a post where he is surprised to see you still saying shit about him because you were previously blocked and that is supposed to shut you up for life I guess.

    Then there's this flavor:

    Not a good day to troll me. I'm heartbroken, I'm angry, and I am very sad.— Bill Schmalfeldt (@ParkinsonsRadio) September 6, 2014

    where we should cower in awe at the prospect of receiving his feared BLOCKage.

    I like to think I've gotten a Block on every new identity he's trotted out. Someitmes I get it for trolling hard, sometimes by following and seeing if he notices (how can he not with so few followers). Today's was a straight up Block bleg.

    And I completely understand his kids no calling him about whoever's death. A) they probably avoid like the plague thinking about him much less actuall contact. and B) they probably know exactly how Dumbass treated and felt about the guy in real life and know he;s lying through his mayo to give himself a patina of sympathy and a scenario for another round of bitchin about his ex and his kids.

    Vulva!

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
    1. hahahahaha YES!! Too, too funny how he inserts himself into a twitter conversation, even if he wasn't mentioned at all; no @mention, no mention of his first or last names, no mention of any known nicknames or acronyms, no implied reference to him whatsoever, such as with Popehat discussing, iirc, a university administrator in California. Then he butts into Popehat's conversations, and starts blocking people -- as if that's some sort of punishment! hahahaha

      If he'd had that twitter account for more than a week or two, I'll bet at least some of those he blocked would have already blocked him. hahahaha It's not like he's popular, or runs a popular site with a community that's worth putting up with him to be able to access it. hahahaha

      FTR - the reason I, and probably the reason most others who weren't directly involved even noticed that particular silliness wasn't because of watching his twitter feed. I follow some of those who were contacted, such as, again, Popehat.

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
  7. Nobody @ mentioned him, yet he butted into convos and made them about him, then got his vagina hurt when people confronted him with his lies. Now he's back to criticizing Hoge's blog by calling it "fascist" .

    The man just can't stand to be left alone, yet he can't stand the attention he gets. Truly he is a 12 year old girl.

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
    1. Your comment is dead on with one small exception. I think his mental age is somewhat less than 12 and more closely approximates that of Wilber Whatley of the 'Dunwich Horror' fame which would put it at about 4-1/2 years. Little Miss Muffet just cannot stand to be left alone and desperately craves whatever attention she can still get.

      I would expect the Elkridge Horror to soon try for even more notoriety and infamy to be apprehended as she is running down the runway of nearby BWI airport screaming for more mayonnaise and foot-longs.

      She is absolutely pathetic. Like OBozo, it's always all about her.

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
  8. Oh, my goodness.

    Really? Honestly?

    Anonymous commenters using Patrick Grady's name for a handle, posting obscenities at me?

    Oh, I'll bruise!

    But the best part is that the comments are coming from an IP address deep in Schmalfeldt territory...

    Where else but The Netherlands?

    Seriously?

    Do better, Charles.

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
    1. Everyone was leaving him alone but he had to start his shit again. Now he is mad he is getting the attention he wanted? Dude needs to grow up and just walk away.

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
    2. Life is a series of ups and downs.

      Nearly four inches of rain and flooding here=Down.

      Cardinals open their season with a win over the Chargers=Up

      Inspector Jiggles still on this side of the grass=Down

      Looking forward to the next up.

      Like(0)Dislike(0)

Comments are closed.