Dread Head Dread Vlog Dreadlocks Videos

Error
  • Error loading feed data.

When I went to post I found a message from one of the forums. Below is their message and below that my response. I'll come back and comment on this later. It's 11pm and I still haven't eaten.

-KJC

 

 


Their Letter:

 

 

On behalf of Dreadlocksite approved by the admins and members.Dear Johnny Clean:

Thank you for agreeing to participate in the debate we hosted at the
dreadlockssite forum. The goal was to further honest, unbiased
knowledge about dreadlocks and dreadlocking methods, by asking you
simple questions about how your products are formulated and to clarify
contradictions you make in your own web content and videos. For
educational purposes, your answers and our rebuttals were to be made
fully accessible to the public.

We expected a live debate. However, all you did was sign into our forum, post a 4,600-word "Dreadlocks Treaty Letter" and then disappear. Many of us stayed on the forum for over two hours, expecting you to come back and participate, or at least post a response to all the comments asking where you were. Later we found out through your Facebook page ... See Morethat you refuse to do a live debate, though you did not tell us this directly. As the host of the debate, we were very disappointed at your lack of participation and communication.
Not one single member of our 1,200-member forum has agreed to sign your "Dreadlocks Treaty" since it is based on categorizing people and presumes to speak for their motivations and beliefs. Your document contains several other things that have no place in a "treaty" and are completely irrelevant to the issues up for debate.
We also did not appreciate you re-wording our questions at the last minute without our knowledge or consent; it violated the spirit of the debate. If you needed clarification on a question or did not like the way it was worded, you had ample time (weeks) to ask us for a rewrite. If you ever come back to our forum and read the official debate thread, you will see your actions have not fostered any goodwill towards you or your company, even among self-described "neutrals".
Since you are unwilling to have a real-time discussion as promised, and insist on re-framing the issues to suit your marketing purposes rather than dealing with them honestly and at face value, we don't see how any constructive progress can be made. We are sad to say we consider the debate a failure.
One of our forum members said it best: "There are no 'winners' or 'losers' because we are all learners." We hope you agree. So in the spirit of full disclosure, we respectfully ask that you post this on your dreadlocks.tv site, above your "Treaty Letter" and links to your answers. Thank you.
You are always welcome on our forum, and we hope to see you there again sometime.


My Response:

 

I agree, your debate was somewhat of a failure.

For one, you needed my participation in order to have the type of debate that you intended to, but you pretended not to actually need me. Instead of seeking my cooperation ahead of time it was stated that you would "have the debate with or without me". Mr. Eagle said that I would be "admitting defeat" if I didn't come, and he assumed I would then feel pressure to participate as he wanted. That was the only invitation I got to your debate and I had no idea there were questions posted until I actually went to post my letter. In regards to the claim that I "Promised" to come debate on your forum, on your terms, here are the actual comments I posted to Mr. Eagle on YouTube (he was trolling my comment trying to win followers as he always does). This was the only time I discussed the debate with with Mr.Eagle. If you'd like to see all the comments you can go to:

http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=ig-E6CyTJlg

If Mr.Eagle decides to erase his comments I've already downloaded them and I can provide a complete copy. My relevant response are below:


@iriesoaringeagle  ...you guys are to

agree on an email address that I will

use to contact you. You will all

collaborate and speak for the anti-wax

community as a whole. I won't be

debating one person - I will be

debating your community. Is that clear?

All emails will be posted publicly on

my site and on all the anti-wax sites.

Then when it's settled it will be

settled for good. This is the only way

I'll sacrifice the time to do this - it

has to last - it has to be done for

good.

@iriesoaringeagle  I've already told

you what type of well documented,

permanent debate I will participate in.

If you wish to hold some other type of

hate-on-wax-fest on your site you'll do

it without me. You can pass your stale

lies around as long as you like.

Regardless you'll get an invitation to

participate in a real debate and you

can or not. I really don't care either

way. Peace.

-----------

As you can see, if Mr.Eagle led you to believe that I promised to participate in the debate on his forum, he lied to you. Let's dwell on that for just a second. He LIED to you. The man that screams so loudly that I am a LIAR. That my site and I are full of LIES. Isn't it interesting that when the facts come out it is HE that must try to explain himself.


What I said was that I would deliver an invitation...and I did. That was the 4600 word letter I posted to your board. Now I'm terribly sorry that your "leader" or whatever he was, lied to you and misrepresented my intentions but it hardly constitutes a broken promise on my part.

I hope that his betrayal doesn't prevent you from participating in a truly worth while debate. I'd like each of you to please consider accepting my invitation to a debate that will remain solidly on topic. Please review the Dreadlocks Treaty as well. It is not a finished document that is being forced on you - it is a draft. I'm asking for everyone's input. It is something we must all agree on before we can sign and benefit from it.

I've heard two mentions now that you don't like the two groups that I proposed in my initial Treaty Letter. Let's make some progress on this right now.

You guys agree on some things. People who use dreadwax and love it agree on some things. That's all I'm saying. Each group has some common beliefs about dreadlocks and the two groups tend to disagree with each other.


In my Dreadlocks Treaty letter I listed some beliefs and ideas that I thought united each group. Which ones specifically don't you agree with? I'm asking you...not telling you. Get it? Let's see what we have in common and what we don't.

The worst thing we can do is pretend that our group is the only group and that everyone that doesn't happen agree with us is just wrong. I hope that makes sense. Let me know your thoughts.

Now if what you want is the truth you have an open invitation to work with me until we discover it. The debate is about the questions and the answers. The treaty is about what we do when we have agreed and come to a conclusion. If answers and moving forward are the things that concern you then please focus on the issues and participate in The Dreadlocks Treaty debate.

Now your debate, the one you started on your site, is, as you pointed out, is lacking my participation. This leaves you with two choices. You can keep chatting with yourselves, agreeing with each other about dread wax or you can join our debate - which is just beginning. You should find it quite relevant because each of the initial questions were inspired by questions you proposed. On the other hand, if you're only interested in who's comming to your forum and you have no desire to participate in a focused debate without the drama then you'll ignore my request. Please give this some thought before you make a decision.

PS:I thought I made it clear why a
real-time debate doesn't work for me?
Maybe I left that out of my letter??
For progress to be made we'll often
have to come up with an experiment and
carry it out. This can't be done in
real-time unless you're all coming over
to hang out and play "lab" with me in
the kitchen. I also check my facts. I
want to do everything I can to prevent
mistakes or misleading information.

I feel less would be settled real-time
because we'd just be passing around
opinions and sharing generalities much like
you guys do now on your board.

Without a treaty in place what is said
is so temporary it's not even worth saying.
I could prove and demonstrate until I'm
blue and I'd still have to deal with random
accusations and slanderous comments.


I hope you can see it from my perspective
and can understand and respect my position.

-KJC

 

 


 

 

Their Response which came next:

 

You shouldn't have to play lab. You should know your product like the back of your hand, you should know ALL effects it has on your dreads without experiments. Why are you selling it when you don't know enough about it to answer 20 simple questions?
And really, calling SE a liar and a troll?
We have proof that natural dreads are beautiful, where ... See Moredid he lie?
I would believe a misunderstanding... but an outright lie!
At least he knows what he's talking about. Know your product before you glorify it!

 

 


 

A response by Amy:

 

Proving natural dreads are beautiful would be akin to 'proving' that I think brown is a beautiful color. It's a matter of personal opinion and preference. Here are a few quotes I picked out of that YouTube link:

iriesoaringeagle: "i am the webmaster and the entire debate will be held *live* on the website 8 pm est may 7th thats plenty of time to prepare"

(asterisks added by me)... See More

KnottyJonnyClean: "...I'll participate in a debate but its not going to be a rock throwing contest on someones message board..."

I think this misunderstanding of live vs. not is understandable given the 'conversation' that took place on YouTube. SoaringEagle did say LIVE, but KJC must have accidentally skipped over it or disregarded it thinking it was not actually part of the terms of the 'agreement'. (Not meant as an accusation, of course, just stating.) I think that the nature of the debate should be more explicitly stated in your initial letter. I also think that Lisa has a point; you should (and I believe DO!) know more than enough about your own products to participate in a debate. I've seen this myself in our personal e-mails we've exchanged.

Although experiments may be a part of this debate, past information and documented experiences should qualify as 'factual' enough as support. I do believe that the amount of time this 'debate' is taking (and I'm not sure, by definition, it qualifies as a debate if all you're doing is experiments and presenting one another with the results.... that's more like show and tell, LOL) is doing you no favors to your relations with the "anti-wax contingent", so to speak. This is because of the obvious live vs. not misunderstanding and I think that in order for things to continue and this debate to happen both sides need to re-examine (in a COOL, CALM, and COLLECTED WAY) the format in which this will all go down to TOGETHER decide on what way we work best given the information and results everyone wants.

 


 

My Response:

 

Here we remain....focusing on the mechanics of the debate, and making no progress on the topics. How sad. =[


Point 1:

I'm comfortable in my knowledge of my products. I've been solving peoples dread problems for 10 years. The reason for experiments is not for me to Learn - it's for me to show how something can be Learned. I usually know the outcome of the experiment before I do it.

Yes I could go to a forum and say "I know that DHHQ Dread Wax can be melted out with a hair dryer". Then SE will say something like "YOURE A LIAR - NO IT CAN'T". How does that help anyone? That is a waste of everyones time. An experiment will offer factual evidence, not opinions. You can't say - the experiment is a liar. You can't say that what you just saw didn't happen. You can (and I'm sure SE will) say that the experiment was faked somehow. But therein lies the beauty of the experiment. It is completely repeatable. That means that any person, anywhere in the world, that doubts it's validity can repeat it and verify the conclusion.

This has now been explained so clearly that I'll interpret any  further comments that don't take this information into account as a direct waste of everyone's time.

Point 2:

Amy I appreciate your unbiased objective stance and I wish that I could accept the idea that there was some sort of misunderstanding.
Had only those two comment been made, the ones you mentioned, then I could see that as a possibility (very unlikely but still) and I could give him the benefit of the doubt but those were not the only comments I made. I was VERY clear that I intended to do things by email and that I would send him an invitation.

He outright lied to everyone involved. Anyone that denies that and wishes to keep reason on their side is going to have to do a real good job of explaining how my words below could possibly be interpreted as a promise to participate in the debate that he proposed on his forum. The first one is the full version of the comment that you posted part of. Notice how I clearly state that my intention is to do things by email:

@iriesoaringeagle I really want to believe that you're not flat out lying to me but I can't understand why not one single customer, out of all these supposed disappointed customers, hasn't gotten in touch with me in 10 YEARS. It makes no sense at all. I'll participate in a debate but its not going to be a rock throwing contest on someones message board. It will be by email and you and your friends can write the responses together. I'll send the initial email to any address you guys choose.


@iriesoaringeagle you guys are to agree on an email address that I will use to contact you. You will all collaborate and speak for the anti-wax community as a whole. I won't be debating one person - I will be debating your community. Is that clear? All emails will be posted publicly on my site and on all the anti-wax sites. Then when it's settled it will be settled for good. This is the only way I'll sacrifice the time to do this - it has to last - it has to be done for good.

@iriesoaringeagle I've already told you what type of well documented, permanent debate I will participate in. If you wish to hold some other type of hate-on-wax-fest on your site you'll do it without me. You can pass your stale lies around as long as you like. Regardless you'll get an invitation to participate in a real debate and you can or not.

-----------------------------------


After reading through my comments it's very obvious that I had no intention whatsoever to debate on the forum - and I certainly made no promises. This is an example of a liar caught in his lie and anyone that chooses to back him up needs to really think about where they have placed their loyalties. Maybe you find that you are too caught up in what you already "believe" to step back and asses the situation, that you are too personally involved to call a lie a lie....if that's the case I hope you are able to clear your mind and open yourself to what is going on.

-KJC



 

Their post:

I find it funny that you deleted this last time I put it up... got caught in a contradiction and didn't like it so you it it and AGAIN look at the quote velow, that's the second time you did that.
What I put EXACTLY was
"Don't forget this is a debate and there are two sides while KJC is only
giving you links to one. Even... though you quoted "No one party should
have total control over the content"

You and your contradictions

 


 

 

My Response:

Let me ask you.... Is this group called the "official johnny clean dreadlocks and dread wax debate"

No it's not. Because that was the name of YOUR debate. The one I never agreed to. (see previous posts below)

I deleted the link to YOUR debate because I'm not (and never was)  participating in it. I'm participating in the "Dreadlocks Treaty Debate" - The one you apparently didn't read the invitation to...Get it?

You say that I'm contradicting myself yet there is no contradiction -

In order for it to be a contradiction your forum would have to represent the "other" side of the argument. I don't see how it can since all we've done so far is decide on the first question - which due to correspondence of this type I haven't had time to answer - there is nothing further for you to say until I have answered your question.

The last time I checked your forum was still just "Jonny Bashing" and making accusations that you can't back up. That's not constructive - that's not part of the Dreadlocks Treaty Debate - and I see no reason to help you drive traffic to it.

When I post my answer THEN it's your turn. In the mean time please kindly refrain from spamming this group with links
to your site.

Your forum does have a place though - it's where you guys can discus and decide on how you would like to respond.

If you're bored and you'd like to help out please review the Dreadlocks Treaty that  I proposed and help me revise it so that we both agree on it and can sign it. Why don't you guys start a clean forum thread that stays on the topic of the treaty itself....if your thread is working to make progress on the treaty then it's relevant and I wouldn't consider links to that thread to be spam.


Finally...

I do not have the time to continue this back and forth that doesn't help us move forward.

I'll do my best to remove all future correspondence posted to this group  unless it's somehow relevant to the debate and moves things forward.

Let me be EXTRAORDINARILY clear about why I'm doing this. I am one of two people that run DreadHeadHQ. Obviously my time is severely limited. I can't possibly take the time to respond to every silly accusation that is dreamed up and posted on this wall and I have no intention of letting them sit there unanswered -only to give the appearance that I'm unable to respond. Since I only have time to leave them there or remove them I will remove them.

The louder it's cried that I "removed them because I was scared to answer" or whatever you dream up, the more certain I'll be that your goal is misdirection rather than progress.


A message from SE:

 

You know the outcome of an experiment before preforming the
experiment because you design the experiment to suite the desired
results the experiment you proposed was this.

Add wax to 1 dread, elmers glue to anothert and palm roll the 2 for a
month if 1 changed sizes and the other didnt according to you this
someho...w proved that wax didnt glue hair together..thats faulty logic all
it proves is that glue dries hard wax dries firm
Any experiments performed would need to make sense scientifically and
yours simply dont they are false experiments to prove false information

yes its repeatable but it proves nothing.

We have positive proof that wax remains in dreads for up to 6 years after the last waxing.. the proof lies in in cut off and combed out dreads
that were full of wax; that also is a repeeatable experiment because
thousands of dreads a year are cut due to wax.

-SE


My Response:

 

I do not have the time to continue this back and forth that doesn't help us move forward.

I'll do my best to remove all future correspondence posted to this group  unless it's somehow relevant to the debate and moves things forward.

Let me be EXTRAORDINARILY clear about why I'm doing this. I am one of two people that run DreadHeadHQ. Obviously my time is severely limited. I can't possibly take the time to respond to every silly accusation that is dreamed up and posted on this wall and I have no intention of letting them sit there unanswered -only to give the appearance that I'm unable to respond. Since I only have time to leave them there or remove them I will remove them.

The louder it's cried that I "removed them because I was scared to answer" or whatever you dream up, the more certain I'll be that your goal is misdirection rather than progress.


PS: What you have there is not proof, technically it's very weak anecdotal evidence. To say there's a big difference is a gross understatement.

It would only be a repeatable experiment if every variable was controlled for six years. If that wasn't unreasonable enough on it's own you'd also need 6 years to repeat the experiment. Did you completely funk 7th grade science? I slept and drew through every minute of it and apparently I got more out of it than you did. lol

Don't worry, if it's experiments and cold hard facts that you want to debate you've come to the right place. Just sit tight and I'll post my answer as soon as it's finished.

Newsletta Signup

Get  News!
* indicates required

dreadlocks spread

Get the Feed!
Dreadlocks.tv Site RSS