Controlling Personalities 101: Exploiting Gray Areas
Not all controlling personalities are manipulative. Some are unintentionally exploitative. But some are willfully deceptive, and engaging such a personality can be exasperating for people who don't have a name for what's happening.
People unfamiliar with controlling personalities who scale to success mistake their deception for brilliance. (This is stage two.)
The truth is, manipulation tactics are not brilliant, they've been around for millenia, and in total the tactics comprise a list of about eight. Many are cataloged in George K. Simon's book In Sheep's Clothing.
Manipulators appear different and new because old tactics from a finite set are used in different combinations and permutations by new players in different settings -- sometimes brilliant settings -- through history.
When tactics are seen for what they are, the brilliance of the setting stands or falls on its own merits.
-----
"Exploiting the gray area" is a manipulation *platform* but it's a tactic too.
And it's maddening for "good-faith" people to engage on such a platform until they have a handle on it, or a name for what's going on. Here's a clever setting, on a gray area platform, and an old manipulation tactic achieved via "notification theater":
(Notification theater derived from security theater, "the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to achieve it.")
The example above bundles traditional manipulation tactics. "Notification theater," the primary tactic is better known by its traditional name, "lying by omission."
Stage two, described at the beginning of this post, happens when the citizen detects a vague pattern in the actor's behavior that leaves the audience, or subjects, deceived. The citizen mistakes deception for the actor's brilliance.
In stage one, a trusting citizen mistakes a controlling personality for naive. In case after case, the actor's seeming naivete cost his subjects, and left him at an advantage. That's stage one.
Stage three is where both the trusting (gaslit) and mistrusting (skeptical) citizens live after knowing the actor for a time: oscillating between stages one and two. That space is a gray area: never knowing if the actor is intentionally or unintentionally manipulating.
There isn't much brilliance required for an actor to maintain this ruse, if it is a ruse. (We're in the gray area now.) If the aggression or manipulation is intentional, it is a ruse. And the only impressive display is the actor's demonstration of considerable will maintaining the ruse over time.
If the aggression or manipulation is unintentional, then the actor's behavior isn't a ruse, he (or she) merely has a naturally aggressive temperament. By default, such an actor is selfish and manipulative. With much concentration, the actor is capable of civility and ethics - but good behavior consumes his willpower, provides him no charge, and leaves him tired. As such, an unintentionally manipulative person avoids "above-board," patient behavior when he can.
(Still in the fogged-up gray zone? We're almost out.)
A ruse by any intent smells sour, experts advise, and we should watch what actors do, not what they say:
Being accusatory before enough citizens are wise makes you look paranoid and abusive, or the gravest capitalistic sin: pessimistic, "negative." (Guts are required.)
"Etiquette requires the presumption of good until the contrary is proved," Emily Post said.
Guts are required to name what "notification theater" more closely resembles "lying in trade." Lying in trade occurs "when the seller of a product or service may advertise untrue facts about the product or service in order to gain sales, especially by competitive advantage."
Is that a fair charge, lying in trade, "when the seller [corporation] of a product or service [social media account] may advertise untrue facts [unread messages] about the product or service in order to gain sales [granting permission to use all my personal data] especially by competitive advantage [hmmm...]"
A competitive advantage. A competitive advantage. Hmmm...
Ethics and lawful behavior around these actors require mindfulness, to refrain from libel and slander when engaging with what appears to be an aggressive manipulator exploiting your presumption of his good will.
<- Controlling Personalities 101: On Character & An 'Unsubmitted Will'
----------------
Further Reading:
A European Union legal group, noyb.eu filed four complaints over “forced consent” against Google, Instagram, WhatsApp and Facebook. noyb.eu (pdf)
Controlling Personalities 101: On Character & An 'Unsubmitted Will': offlinereport.net
Controlling Personalities 101: 'Revenge of the Analog' on Facebook: offlinereport.net
7/1/2018 "The company disclosed it was still sharing information of users’ friends, such as name, gender, birth date, current city or hometown, photos and page likes, with 61 app developers nearly six months after it said it stopped access to this data in 2015." marketwatch.com
This work by AJ Fish is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
People unfamiliar with controlling personalities who scale to success mistake their deception for brilliance. (This is stage two.)
The truth is, manipulation tactics are not brilliant, they've been around for millenia, and in total the tactics comprise a list of about eight. Many are cataloged in George K. Simon's book In Sheep's Clothing.
Manipulators appear different and new because old tactics from a finite set are used in different combinations and permutations by new players in different settings -- sometimes brilliant settings -- through history.
When tactics are seen for what they are, the brilliance of the setting stands or falls on its own merits.
-----
"Exploiting the gray area" is a manipulation *platform* but it's a tactic too.
And it's maddening for "good-faith" people to engage on such a platform until they have a handle on it, or a name for what's going on. Here's a clever setting, on a gray area platform, and an old manipulation tactic achieved via "notification theater":
(Notification theater derived from security theater, "the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to achieve it.")
The example above bundles traditional manipulation tactics. "Notification theater," the primary tactic is better known by its traditional name, "lying by omission."
Stage two, described at the beginning of this post, happens when the citizen detects a vague pattern in the actor's behavior that leaves the audience, or subjects, deceived. The citizen mistakes deception for the actor's brilliance.
In stage one, a trusting citizen mistakes a controlling personality for naive. In case after case, the actor's seeming naivete cost his subjects, and left him at an advantage. That's stage one.
Stage three is where both the trusting (gaslit) and mistrusting (skeptical) citizens live after knowing the actor for a time: oscillating between stages one and two. That space is a gray area: never knowing if the actor is intentionally or unintentionally manipulating.
There isn't much brilliance required for an actor to maintain this ruse, if it is a ruse. (We're in the gray area now.) If the aggression or manipulation is intentional, it is a ruse. And the only impressive display is the actor's demonstration of considerable will maintaining the ruse over time.
If the aggression or manipulation is unintentional, then the actor's behavior isn't a ruse, he (or she) merely has a naturally aggressive temperament. By default, such an actor is selfish and manipulative. With much concentration, the actor is capable of civility and ethics - but good behavior consumes his willpower, provides him no charge, and leaves him tired. As such, an unintentionally manipulative person avoids "above-board," patient behavior when he can.
(Still in the fogged-up gray zone? We're almost out.)
A ruse by any intent smells sour, experts advise, and we should watch what actors do, not what they say:
Being accusatory before enough citizens are wise makes you look paranoid and abusive, or the gravest capitalistic sin: pessimistic, "negative." (Guts are required.)
"Etiquette requires the presumption of good until the contrary is proved," Emily Post said.
Guts are required to name what "notification theater" more closely resembles "lying in trade." Lying in trade occurs "when the seller of a product or service may advertise untrue facts about the product or service in order to gain sales, especially by competitive advantage."
Is that a fair charge, lying in trade, "when the seller [corporation] of a product or service [social media account] may advertise untrue facts [unread messages] about the product or service in order to gain sales [granting permission to use all my personal data] especially by competitive advantage [hmmm...]"
A competitive advantage. A competitive advantage. Hmmm...
Ethics and lawful behavior around these actors require mindfulness, to refrain from libel and slander when engaging with what appears to be an aggressive manipulator exploiting your presumption of his good will.
----------------
Further Reading:
A European Union legal group, noyb.eu filed four complaints over “forced consent” against Google, Instagram, WhatsApp and Facebook. noyb.eu (pdf)
Controlling Personalities 101: On Character & An 'Unsubmitted Will': offlinereport.net
Controlling Personalities 101: 'Revenge of the Analog' on Facebook: offlinereport.net
7/1/2018 "The company disclosed it was still sharing information of users’ friends, such as name, gender, birth date, current city or hometown, photos and page likes, with 61 app developers nearly six months after it said it stopped access to this data in 2015." marketwatch.com
This work by AJ Fish is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
