Posted on 02/06/2014 7:26:57 PM PST by Morgana
Boycotts are usually called for people to their dissatisfaction with someone or some group or something and to let your dissatisfaction be known publically
Usually boycotts get started by someone calling for one publically to get the ball rolling. So a fair amount of, um, salesmanship is involved to have a successful boycott.
Since it’s not enforceable in any way, it’s merely a suggestion (I’m speaking of all boycotts).
In this particular case, Staneck is suggesting that people might want to show their dissatisfaction with the Girl Scout organization for promoting high profile pro-Abortion woman as role models to young girls.
Although she gave a lot of possibly extraneous information, it might be background info that would motivate more people to boycott, people who perhaps are not familiar with the backstory on the Girl Scouts.
No doubt it could have been presented more clearly but I thought it was very clear what she was suggesting. I can’t see any other interpretation
So a fair amount of, um, salesmanship
***Then the Primary Sales person needs to learn how to WRITE.
is involved to have a successful boycott.
Since it’s not enforceable in any way, it’s merely a suggestion (I’m speaking of all boycotts).
***well... whatever. It was a pisspoor display.
In this particular case, Staneck is suggesting that people might want to show their dissatisfaction with the Girl Scout organization for promoting high profile pro-Abortion woman as role models to young girls.
***To be candid, that’s NEWS to me, even after reading her ridiculously written article. If she is ONLY writing to those who follow her, she should consider confining her efforts to TWitter.
Her suggested boycott is doomed. Because of her writing ability. We all admire her passion.
Their aberrance has been known for years. How do they plan to hide it? I hope GSA crashes and burns.
Her message is clear to me, and this is not a writing class. Attacking someones writing style is straight from the Alinsky playbook. I don’t get it. For over ten years, I have been reading about the degeneration of the girl scouts. This is a serious topic, and you have tried to be snarky. It’s about the message not the messenger.
This is a serious topic, and you have tried to be snarky.
***No. Very simply, the message was so poorly written as to be obscured completely.
It’s about the message not the messenger.
***And what have I said about the messenger? zip. I’ve been commenting on the message, which was very poorly written and as a result, the movement suffers.
They cannot hide. They’ve been exposed...only people who support abortion buy their products.
My point is to show that this author may be disingenous at best and falicious at worst.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.