I think Gordon went fishing today a`la Don Alm....

Then when he gets back he'll see how many he caught.....

LOL!

Anya :)

that teeny, tiny little word "test" by the word LINK at the bottom of his post?

Am I dumb, or what??

I guess the laugh's on me!

Anya.

...and I can assure you ALL that we failed to read the entire letter. I am not going to give anythng away because I don't have permission to, but because of all the excitement the letter caused each of us emotionally we totally missed something most pertinent.

Taylor

> Then when he gets back he'll see how many he
> caught.....

> LOL!

> Anya :)

How is it that he can take the information from all the sources he quoted and LEGALLY re-package it and sell it for his own profit?

I mean, isn't most of the info copyrighted by the sources he gleaned it from?

Is that the catch?

Is this a P.T. Barnum (sucker born every minute) sort of thing?

Anya.

> ...and I can assure you ALL that we failed
> to read the entire letter. I am not going to
> give anythng away because I don't have
> permission to, but because of all the
> excitement the letter caused each of us
> emotionally we totally missed something most
> pertinent.

> Taylor

I can assure you of ONE thing...Gordon has the highest ethics, period!

His knowledge is simply vast and his creativity even more vast.

As far as Gordon re-packaging information, I don't see him having a problem with taking what he has gleaned and re-distributing it with his won originality.

The GREATS do this. Matter of fact, Dan Kennedy has made millions doing just that. Taking ideas and strategies from one industry (a la Jay Abraham) and re-engineering those same ideas thus exploiting opportunities in other industries.

There's not much new under the sun. Re-engineering continues to bring about so-called new products daily.

Taylor

> How is it that he can take the information
> from all the sources he quoted and LEGALLY
> re-package it and sell it for his own
> profit?

> I mean, isn't most of the info copyrighted
> by the sources he gleaned it from?

> Is that the catch?

> Is this a P.T. Barnum (sucker born every
> minute) sort of thing?

> Anya.

. . . and presented in his words, doesn't that make it his? I don't mean cosmetic rearrangements of information. That's plagiarism.

But the genuine presentation of what one has learned, in ones OWN words, and in light of one's OWN experiences - well,

Shoot. I'd have to have 10 to 12 pages of footnotes for every time I've expressed a concept I embrace, or belief I've come to hold.

'Sides. This is Gordon. He's learned no-LEARNED- from all those folks. You can be sure his unique approach to WHATEVER he's learned will constitute NEW learning.

One more thing. Even if it's only (did I say that?) presentation of the actual words of the masters, he'll most likely have gotten clearance.

More importantly, he'll have found the kernel of truth that WE miss when we read these same folks' stuff.

Mary

Gordon of plaguarism.....I was looking for the hitch that Taylor spoke of - the thing we all missed. So I just took a wild guess and wondered if that was it. Not that Gordon was going to literally plaguarize someone!

Taylor said, and I quote, "I can assure you ALL that we failed to read the entire letter..... because of all the excitement the letter caused each of us emotionally we totally missed something most pertinent. "

So it seems as if we are all missing something here and Gordon is waiting to see if somebody figures it out.

I think!

Anya.

> . . . and presented in his words, doesn't
> that make it his? I don't mean cosmetic
> rearrangements of information. That's
> plagiarism.

> But the genuine presentation of what one has
> learned, in ones OWN words, and in light of
> one's OWN experiences - well,

> Shoot. I'd have to have 10 to 12 pages of
> footnotes for every time I've expressed a
> concept I embrace, or belief I've come to
> hold.

> 'Sides. This is Gordon. He's learned
> no-LEARNED- from all those folks. You can be
> sure his unique approach to WHATEVER he's
> learned will constitute NEW learning.

> One more thing. Even if it's only (did I say
> that?) presentation of the actual words of
> the masters, he'll most likely have gotten
> clearance.

> More importantly, he'll have found the
> kernel of truth that WE miss when we read
> these same folks' stuff.

> Mary

> Gordon of plaguarism.....I was looking for
> the hitch that Taylor spoke of - the thing
> we all missed. So I just took a wild guess
> and wondered if that was it. Not that Gordon
> was going to literally plaguarize someone!

> Taylor said, and I quote, "I can assure
> you ALL that we failed to read the entire
> letter..... because of all the excitement
> the letter caused each of us emotionally we
> totally missed something most pertinent.
> "

> So it seems as if we are all missing
> something here and Gordon is waiting to see
> if somebody figures it out.

> I think!

Anya,

I don't think your post was accusatory, and I DO think you hit the nail right on the head as far as the "test only" link -- the fine print.

Hmmm, maybe ole' Gordon was trying to ascertain whether, by getting folks so wrapped up in the alure of his copyrighting, this little tidbit would go unnoticed!

Well, I think it wasn't until I read it 2 or 3 times that it hit me.

Now for the big question....now that you have seduced us with your persuasive ad copy, Gordon, are you going to offer "the goods"?