National and Independant Groups

The rise of PIPS-UK, PIPS-USA, PIPS-Canada and all other national and independant groups gave me serious pause for concern. One of those concerns is in the area of information disemination.

Why should any National or Independant group gain priority for announcements by having the privilege of direct communication with the officers of the primary structure (PIPS)?

Oh yes, I can understand the reason for organizing or promoting national, regional or independant events that PIPS members could benefit from, but is it ethical to use those events to promote independant diversification when it is obvious that diversification is one of the primary objective of PIPS?

The conflict and bru-ha-ha over BTI (formerly PIPS-USA) confirms my concern.

I believe in free enterprize, but find it personally un-ethical to develop diversification programs piggy-backing on someone elses work.

Can someone help me out on this?


ON ANOTHER NOTE,

To remove all speculation, could PIPS not put up a website with the same IP address (pips.pipsinc.com), to simply provide everyone with current status updates?

NO sign-ups, No login, No Back Office, ...just a splash page.

I have offten bumped into websites that simply display the page with the announcement "Under construction"...

Wouldn't this eliminate the necessity for multiple forums with endless discussion and random ramblings of spurious speculation?

Just thinking out loud...

Maybe it can’t be done because of legalities.
Al

Intersting,

You got very good points here. I also wonder why?

There is no need for a splash page to post annoucements right now.... because there is nothing to announce. Leaks of info occur, indeed, but ultimately Bryan has made it clear that he will not make an official announcement until everything is said and done and in place.

james

It is completely ridiculous to even imply that it is wrong for BTI to diversify. Where do you get off saying what an independent organization should and should not do? I'm not a member of BTI nor do I plan on becoming one, but you people judging Billy for diversifying are WAY off base and imo need to get a life...

PIPS is down right now. No one knows if or when they will be back and if or when they will be paying past the backlog. Those of us with a level head began searching for diversification a long time ago, and in no way does that affect PIPS'well-being.

Trade

Trade...

A little touchy are we?

I asked for help, not a lecture or hostile response.

Teach me.

Bryan creates an organization, travels broadly to meet HIS people...then opportunists step up to the plate...create a PIPS-subculture...use the numbers in their "membership" to gain the confidences of the officers running PIPS, and suddenly our updates for members get hijacked because these "special interest" groups clamor for attention and get it, News releases come from these groups in a conflicting manner and create confusion as each item is reported by someone that "heard" something different. Then when the going gets bumpy, shift gears...kiss Bryan good-bye...use HIS ground-work to do their OWN thing.

Maybe I'm Puritanical, but there is something about that process, that reminds me of a west coast whaling station!

Diversification is NOT the topic. You can do what You want with Your assets, but should you do what you want with someone elses assets? Ethics, maybe the topic, but if my discourse is off-base, teach me. Don't YELL at me.

Kindest regards,

Interesting,
I agree with most of what you say.

Some people are thinking those that find fault with BTI don't see benefit to diversity. As you say, that isn't the point. The problem that I see with the "setup"

(aside from the fact that all things aren't equal, ie: mlm downlines going to "management")

1. that members have systematically been "programmed" to avoid positive discussion about PIPS. Encouraged to believe PIPS is dead, move on.
2. that members aren't privy to or have any say so about the funds collected.

3. the switchover to BTI was probably the right thing to do considering the objectives they seem to have, but, may be a misuse of PIPS "assets' (members) considering the way the group was gathered, and the intentions change that has occurred since the "reorg."

4. IMO, PIPS-USA belongs to PIPS, and apparently waits to be claimed. Perhaps that is one answer to those that paid their money, obtain the "key" and reopen that forum? Let "the members" be in charge and file a "petition" for the fund account held in PIPS, to be transferred to the group. Do things as a group voting on decisions that need decided, and, not function as an only management is in charge organization.

VP