Show Me On This Doll Where MommyGyver Hurt You...
My attorneys have just filed the response to LuLaRoe's nonsensical case against me. In their complaint, they allege damages that they don't outline, demand sources for my articles- though I've named many already in the blogs themselves. I've even reported suspicious activity to them directly and offered to provide information about those that were blatantly telling stories about the company that simply were untrue. My efforts were met with threats. I've said repeatedly- LuLaRoe has enough problems, we do not need to create them in the stories we share, we can simply reach out and pick one that is floating in the seemingly infinite pool of flubs they dive into all on their own. 18 pages of response to LuLaRoe's petition... in layman's terms, this is what it says: "Hi, we're so sorry you feel sad. Please show us on this doll where MommyGyver hurt you, because you didn't do it in your petition. PS. She's already tried to help you... see? PPS. Reporter." The response, laden with case law to support our position- is well thought out and often repetitive. I assume the points were written over and over because there seems to be a history of their counsel being slow on the uptake. They wouldn't want to Bill miss anything included here. How do I feel? The same as I did before. I think that you don't have to like me or my blog- my writing style, the character I play here, but there is a lot of work that goes into these articles. The goal was never to harm- but to preserve... to preserve the integrity of the individuals who claim to have been harmed after joining this company. I limit my own firsthand stories and experiences by design. I'm here to help share YOUR stories. To let these women know they aren't crazy. To provide evidence of the allegations being leveled against the company from all angles now... and to defend not just my own right to first amendment protections, but YOURS. My attorneys were kind enough to include that piece of information in the response, and for that, I am grateful: "LuLaRoe's demands raise serious First Amendment concerns for hundreds of current and former consultants who will not have an opportunity to respond to this petition, and whose rights are entrusted to the discretion of this court."
and
"MommyGyver seeks this protection for her sources, not for herself." I appreciate that. If I was afraid to speak out, I'd have never put my name on anything I've written. I'd hide and be anonymous myself. It's because WHO I am is so widely known now, that I am absolutely careful about the due diligence that is required to construct one of my articles. I often do not write about topics that seem to be generated by rumors and gossip- such as the supposed home office fires, the claim that the "check writing machine is broken, and refund checks are delayed again because of it." (Michael Brady, is your hand and pen broken too?) Yes, there is a layer of snark here. Maybe some critics would prefer a more "book report" format to my style. "Just the facts, ma'am", but the reason for the snark is that I feel it's deserved. So many women (and some men) write in about what is happening to them, should their frustrations and tone be muted because of the fact that I'm reporting on a topic? I think not. I also believe that so much of this is so UNbelieveable that there has to be a level of chiding and humor built in, or this would simply come off as a whiny complaint blog. I write the way I do in part for entertainment value- you don't have to like it... The method of delivery should not detract from the message- and the message is simple- There is something foul happening here, and somebody needs to say something so that others may step in to DO something. The company has had every opportunity to address these issues, and instead, they focus on attempted intimidation of those that could provide them the deepest insight into the shortcomings of their business. I'm dialed right into their consultant base- why threaten me when I could have provided real answers to questions like- "What are the biggest complaints?" "Where are they talking about this?" And of course- "How do you think we can fix this?" Instead, they have chosen to go toe to toe with me and threaten that they will pursue others- but stipulate no actual damages. They claim that confidential information has been shared- yet my own poll done in a group of former consultants showed that over a hundred that responded were still getting these "confidential" emails. What obligation are these people under to withhold information that may or may not be considered confidential if they are no longer retailers, and the company simply does a poor job of protecting said information by handing it out to everyone and anyone. How confidential can it possibly be? They also have a history of not locking people's access to their back offices once their resignation has been entered. One could argue that a former consultant has no business entering their back office once they resign, but you can also argue that again, how confidential is this information if they don't do their own due diligence to safeguard it? I'm not here to argue legalities, but the idea that a company can launch an assault on a single person to identify their sources when they admit themselves that they have corporate office spies in various LuLaRoe related groups to watch the communications. Can't they see for themselves who is disgruntled? We know they read this blog! Check the comments section on my social media page? Here's a fresh one for you- LuLaRoe- read YOUR OWN social media pages. You've got thousands of people speaking up, and yet you want my sources? What LuLaRoe also fails to address are the demands they sent me prior to this filing were met with the same response- "Please provide me a list of what it is that you question, and I will do my best to show that it was attained legally by me." I have had more than a few conversations with the company trying to help them understand my position, and provide them olive branches by way of information on false information provided to me. When they expressed that they might have interest in pursuing one individual in particular whom they said (and I had evidence of) was lying about her experience with the company, I offered to provide them the evidence. They refused it. Again I state that we don't need to invent issues with the company. They already exist. It's an abbondanza of fuck-ups. What I got for my effort was more demand letters and this bullshit filing. 18 pages of "fuck you" in legalese. No, I'm not going away. And neither should any of you. If you were really, truly wronged, you should speak up. I'm still here to share your stories if you are afraid to on your own. Use me. For those of you that want to read it, the pdf document is under the "files" tab on the blog page, or by clicking HERE. Grab the popcorn, and have a seat. It's a read.
Comments