This tactic is pretty common to get you into a possible MLM scheme. It happened twice to me, and once to my wife. They'll strike up a conversation with you while shopping by commenting on a nice article of clothing or something about you, which leads into a convo about where you work, etc.<p>They're so personable that you're thinking oh nice, I have a new friend and agree to have coffee. Then the second steps and on as the author mentions happens where they start to ask personal questions like if you're happy in life, what would it be like to not have any debt, retire early, etc.<p>This all happens over two-three meetings where they then start to talk about they have a group or mentor they work with that can get you going with your life goals.<p>We never made it into the actual meet the group / mentor part as we knew at this point something felt scammy about it and broke off contact after that.
> Again, I was tempted to cut off contact, but I asked some friends and again they all said I was insane and imagining things. Determined to prove that I was capable of normal human interaction, I carried on.<p>It sounds to me like the author approached these interactions from a place of insecurity, which is exactly what ultra-manipulative types look for in a target. If you don't have a clear idea of what someone wants from you when they ask for your time, it's on you to speak up for yourself and get that clarity. You don't have anything to prove by deciding to continue talking to people that don't seem interested in developing a genuine relationship.<p>> But they walked into that cafe, looked around, and decided I was the easy prey.<p>Given that the author agreed to meet with them four times with an open mind, I'd say that the recruiters found a pretty good target, even if it was ultimately fruitless.
> Still, what I really wanted was to get back to work. It felt rude to say that outright, and they didn’t seem to notice how my eyes kept drifting back to my notebook.<p>This is very hard for some people (I am not being facetious here), but cult weirdos or not, it’s really important to be able to say something like “Thanks for chatting but I’m going to work now.“ No apology is necessary. Nothing equivocal in the words they can grab onto and argue with. No lying, polite or or otherwise.<p>You may need to practice this in the shower or the car. You may need to practice it on people even when you don’t necessarily need to go. But you need to practice it if you are a born and trained people pleaser like me.<p>I regard not being able to do so as something close to life-threatening, because when you are raised to put other people’s interests before your own, you can spiral into incredible depression and self abuse.
> A week later, they suggested we go to lunch again. Again, I was tempted to cut off contact, but I asked some friends and again they all said I was insane and imagining things. Determined to prove that I was capable of normal human interaction, I carried on.<p>Your friends may mean well, but they may also be a bit dumb. You really don't have to interact with people that you don't want to if it's entirely voluntary to begin with, especially if things feel "off".<p>It's easy to claim so in a hypothetical, but I still like to believe that had you asked me, I would have said something like "if it feels so off, don't do it".<p>This is different from being anxious over, say, ordering a pizza over the phone (that I've seen in a few friends), where I would recommend pushing over your anxiety, because that is almost certainly guaranteed to be a short, professional, and, most importantly, absolutely un-intimate conversation.<p>> Determined to prove that I was capable of normal human interaction<p>Yeah, this isn't.
I'm a bit confused. Isn't it possible that they <i>actually were</i> lonely/bored weirdos who are bad at social boundaries and host a (probably mind-numbingly uninteresting) discussion group?<p>Don't get me wrong, I shut these sorts of people down at the first conversation because I hate dilettante philosophy with a passion and have a strong distaste for any hint of spiritualism. But there are underemployed folks at all my regular coffee haunts who are always chatting up willing patrons and will ask to exchange numbers if someone is patient enough to engage. But AFAICT they aren't nefarious, just bored and weird. One hocks CDs of his bad garageband compositions, but again, he's harmless.<p>How did you jump from "cringe" to "cult"?
Unless you know your internal sense of "things being off" is wrong, listen to it.<p>Often times we pick up on subtle cues before we consciously process them.<p>Your evaluations as someone present override what your non-present friends think based off your verbal accounting.
This was an annoyingly skillfully written piece. At numerous points I felt I knew better than the author, only to confront my own foolishness a few sentences later. This kept me reading while my mind drafted the HN comment about how the author is too naive and can’t say no. But true to form, the last paragraph had me questioning everything – was it I who was duped?<p>That said, this definitely wouldn’t have happened to me, given how cold and unapproachable I am. This is great for avoiding scams and people who want to take advantage of me. However, I suspect such standoffishness has denied me many opportunities for social connection. Someone like the author is more likely to stumble into a cult, but also more likely to meet new people. So I guess you take the good with the bad.
As a man, if any female stranger ever initiates a conversation in a cafe, I can safely assume that she has some kind of ulterior motive. That may sound cynical or sad, but that's life.<p>Thus I can shut down this kind of interaction long before I feel obligated to meet people for brunch even though it feels awkward.
Sounds like OP should:<p>Practice enforcing boundaries: If what you really want is to get to work, then there's nothing rude in signalling likewise (e.g. by turning back to your laptop) or saying so directly. What is rude is people who ignore such cues and continue to try talking to you.<p>Listen to intuition: If something/someone feels slightly off (even if you can't articulate precisely what/how), then feel free to distance yourself immediately. You can later ruminate on why at your own convenience.<p>Recognize you don't need to justify feeling disinterest in or even active dislike of someone on sight. They might even be perfectly good people but if you're not drawn to engage, then that's your prerogative. You certainly don't need to prove or disprove their decency/motives by continuing to engage.
<i>> Isn’t that… pretty much exactly what my friends from the cafe did? How do you draw the line between “sensibly taking into account how real people react” and “manipulative dark patterns to literally get people to join your cult”? Perhaps there is no clear boundary.</i><p>I find the final questions interesting... bc for me, it is <i>obvious</i> that there is no clear-cut line, just degrees on a continuum which is healthy on one side and toxic at the other extreme.<p>Human attention is the ultimate currency - we literally spend all of our conscious time allocating it to different uses at a constant rate, and <i>anything</i> that we do to catch the attention of others is asking them to divert part of that use towards ourselves for a benefit.<p>For me, it is a moral duty to make sure that any such interaction is geared towards producing a win-win situation. This is why I consider intrusive advertising to be morally abhorrent - not just for being annoying, but because it is taking away our most valuable resource from us, without even asking for permission. Advertising should be confined to appear on limited, pre-agreed channels where you don't mind finding the occasional relevant ad.<p>In the near future I expect that personal attention managers will supplant the dreadful Skinner boxes that social networks have been built on, and instead provide applications that serve our interests - not those from an outsider.<p>Now I have this little private group to discuss this kind of things, wouldn't you be interested in joining? ;-)
We have a cult in my town. They brand themselves a flavor of sufi. They have a few businesses. A couple seats on the city council.<p>Imagine talking to a guy who's trying hard to sell you a used car. It's like that. Really pushy and manipulative.<p>They focus their recruiting efforts on teens, children, college students. They have a private kindergarten/gradeschool.<p>Years ago I read an FBI list of standard psychological manipulation techniques used by cults. Then I saw them in action at their local coffee shop. Hey, they're "Love Bombing" that person!<p>I was talking to one of their members. Sure we're a "cult". Sure we practice "mind control". Then he proceeds to tell me their special definitions for cult and mind control. That's called "taking control of the language".<p>They use their members as cheap labor at their businesses. And send the profits to their headquarters in Bangladesh where they have some schools, businesses and an orphanage.<p>The leadership has very nice cars.<p>My friend was in it for a few years. Then the "Murshid" (top guy) ordered my friend to send his daughter to their special school in Bangladesh. He noped out at that point.
> How do you draw the line between “sensibly taking into account how real people react” and “manipulative dark patterns to literally get people to join your cult”? Perhaps there is no clear boundary.<p>Are you kidding?<p>The difference was glaring when (and why) they asked you to go private.<p>You want to teach people facts about humidifiers and then (hopefully) see if it stand up to independent inquiry. You changed your approach so that others wouldn't simply dismiss your evidence out of hand.<p>These two would have eventually <i>removed</i> your ability to independently inquire.<p>If you went to a private place with them, there would be a guru whose entire goal would be to use your insecurities and skepticism against you in order to disorient you to such a degree that you become highly suggestible. Could be with lighting, trance music, scented candles, $foo, chants, group games, or anything that pushes your physical and emotional boundaries past what you'd normally be comfortable with, etc. You get a warm feeling, then-- bam-- the guru attributes it all to $foo. Now all your reasoning abilities are fighting against the possibility that there might really be something to this $foo thing.<p>Probably anyone whose been involved rescuing cult members will confirm how dangerous they are. But also consider your own evidence-- how many times did you profess even the mild kind of skepticism that litters HN threads here? From what I read, it seems like you didn't even explicitly mention your intimacy schedule or other red flags as you experienced them. In fact, your only pointed question seemed to come at the very moment they tried to rope you in by asking to go private. In other words-- you gave them time to make their <i>entire</i> cult pitch to you, and only really put up any noticeable friction at the last moment.<p>The lesson is decidedly <i>not</i> how we're all a little bit like cult recruiters. It's that you were close to becoming indoctrinated in a cult. Remember the shot of adrenaline when the sirens started shrieking for you? Now imagine that happening while being surrounded by a room full of those people, with a guru looking directly at you waiting for you to explain the feeling of receiving $foo. And all it would have taken was one more innocent thought about wanting to meet a few more friends.<p>I just realized how alarmist that last line is! I mean, <i>do</i> go and meet more friends. Just not ones in cults. Since you avoided this cult, just remember the feeling of them slowly pushing your boundaries, and use that as a filter in the future.
> My attempted cult recruitment<p>But TFA never confirmed that it was a <i>cult.</i> Suspicious circumstances, yes, but people who meet to discuss things privately doesn't mean cult. It could just mean they get very deep into certain topics and want to pre-screen people.<p>OTOH: TFA was clearly uncomfortable with this couple. He was perfectly within his free will as an adult to discontinue the relationship.
"What was going on here? I saw three possibilities:<p>1.They wanted to be friends.<p>2.They wanted to have sex with me.<p>3.They wanted me to join their religion."<p>I would add the following to that list:<p>4. They wanted to sell me something.<p>5. All of the above.
> They wanted to have sex with me.<p>> They wanted me to join their religion.<p>based on what I know of "new age" cults these two things are not always mutually exclusive<p>ask anyone from an older generation who lived through the late 1960s/early 1970s as a young adult...<p>in the modern era I'd wager there's some degree of venn diagram overlap between MLM recruitment and "open relationship" people too<p>actually as I recall an example of this was shown in entertainment media in the 1999 movie "Go" where a cop and his wife are also running a MLM thing and try to recruit/sleep with one of their targets
I hiked the Long Trail in Vermont some years ago, and there’s a cafe/hostel in Rutland called the Yellow Deli run by 12 Tribes. The joke amongst hikers was that if you stayed there for more than 2 nights, you’d never leave.<p>They left “trail magic” food advertising their establishment, which was pretty tasty, especially to someone with a strong case of hiker hunger. And they’d be very friendly with you while you are at the cafe.<p>Their flyers were completely over the top. Made for some entertaining reading for a day.
> But here’s an uncomfortable analogy: I’ve talked before about how when I first wrote about ultrasonic humidifiers, everyone dismissed the argument for “nonsense” reasons, like not having any citations. Eventually, I realized I could change my argument to avoid that reaction: I was “calmer” and put the citations earlier. Most importantly, I knew that if I clearly stated my thesis early on, would dismiss my article without reading it. So instead I let my claims appear gradually. (I’m not stating that thesis here, either, for the same reason.) Isn’t that… pretty much exactly what my friends from the cafe did? How do you draw the line between “sensibly taking into account how real people react” and “manipulative dark patterns to literally get people to join your cult”? Perhaps there is no clear boundary.<p>The ethical thing to do is whatever you think helps other people. If you think people reading your article are trying to learn true, useful things about humidifiers, it's good to write the article in whatever way is conducive to that. If instead you wrote it in a way designed to make you look the best, or to sell humidifiers, that would be a problem.
The title is inaccurate. There is nothing in here about "cult recruitment", more just the author not being comfortable with the vibe someone was giving off. Which is fine, but it's a far cry from "cult".
What a fun article. It's not about cults at all, it's about "In what order should I communicate my points to best get the point across, and are some orders unethical?"<p>I think about this a lot in terms of argument graphs. Imagine a DAG where premises are on the bottom and the conclusion (or conclusions) are on top. And, like most compelling arguments, the premises are unsurprising and widely held, while the conclusion is wildly counterintuitive. Finally, pretend that the argument is actually valid and true - it's legitimately something new.<p>In what order should you communicate the argument? Do you start top-down? The author tried that with humidifiers and it didn't work at all. Do you start at the very bottom, with the uncontroversial friendly stuff? Well, that's pretty much what the cult did.<p>I prefer a blend of sorts, but it's difficult to systematize. Basically, you're kind of starting at the bottom, but with little spoilers and hints of where you're trying to lead the presentation.
"After 30 minutes or so, I realized I was never getting back to work so I made an excuse to leave." That's an extraordinary amount of time to put up with being interrupted.
I lived in Berkeley, where there are still loads of little cults popping up, so this sort of thing happens fairly often.<p>I knew somebody who was a pretty seasoned cult member and she explained to me that apparently there is a lot of competition between cults to recruit and poach high performing zealots, just like headhunters in tech.
This story is a really great argument for "trust your gut." You don't always need an eloquent articulation of why something is off for it to be real. Also, no experience gets better than the initial meet. If something feels off initially, that feeling will never go away.
This was ALMOST a story worth sharing. The author made a big leap in their conclusion without enough evidence to be compelling, and basically just confirmed their friends' judgements that they were being paranoid. I feel a little sad for the author and hope they break out of their box and live a little. Talk to more strangers. If it seems shady, definitely get out of the situation, but unless something ACTUALLY happens, why waste someone else's time with a story that doesn't have a compelling conclusion?
Ever since I started working in 2015, I often encounter a salesperson from a company that engaged in lead conversion for its customers. They are almost everywhere I've been in my city. What they do is to sell stuffs and donate proceeds/profits from sale to the charity they are working with at that point. While this may not look out of place, the fact that they approach people with a slight lead of "helping charity" only to sell its products make me wary and try to avoid them.<p>What they do is that they will have a short activity to get people to sympathize with their cause (asking to write made-up pet's name to vote on what necessities is important to it), then they will describe that they are doing CSR work for its company in association with the charitable organization. They will conclude the conversation by asking us to purchase products, and some salesperson outright saying that it's a donation (when in fact it isn't). They fix a minimum price of their stuff at $15, but they will try to get a bundle of $60, and when I say I don't have that much, they will keep dropping the price, as low as $3 (no stuff). With the minimum wage here is $10 a day, whatever they're trying to sell is just too expensive.
I had a bunch of similar interactions like these were I grew up and about 6 with different missionaries across Latin America. Starting out with innocent seeming conversations slowly going towards selling their value prop. For me the most repugnant in most of these interactions was, how intentionally they were fishing for very personal things that I'm worried, sad or insecure about just so that they can then present their magical solution for it.
By the way, it's quite fun to join a cult intentionally. I did that a number of times in my early 20ies. It means such an unusual situation to create: you sort of take them seriously and not at the same time. You listen to them with reasonable openness and attention (often extracting some useful thoughts from their philosophies) and even with fair amount of basic human sympathy but without falling into blind faith like ordinary victims or even allowing a slight amount of unnoticed effect on your reason. This is an exercise which can benefit both you and the people from the cult (who often are ordinary members there and are going to get disillusioned with it soon - and an experience of meeting a person who didn't get charmed yet agreed to be open to them is going to help them). It usually ends by both parties losing interest in each other gradually: you stop hearing anything new from them, get bored and give up attending their meetings, they give up inviting actively because they understand they can't really have you anyway.
This type of thing happened to me all the time back in college, except the "cult" was Christianity. It was sorta common on campus, though. But I think I got it a little more because I was a bit of a loner. So many over-friendly dudes wanted to save my soul.<p>Youngs, is this still a thing on college campuses?
It does come off weird if you inquire as to people's blood type and opinion of accidental cremation straight out before you invite them over for a party... but it's best to be open and honest about these things. After all, otherwise they wouldn't know to bring a sacrifice.
About 15 years ago, I was listening to a podcast that was largely about economic philosophy and personal freedoms. High on the libertarian views and it appealed to me at the time. I heard about a meeting organized by the people who made that podcast and decided to check it out. The podcast and related organization were connected to a property investment system at the height of the housing bubble. My wife decided to go with me.<p>We met in the basement of an unfurnished house. There was an American Flag on a free-standing pole. We said the pledge of allegiance and I think there might have been an ambiguous prayer. Then we watched a video of some sort by the founder of the podcast.<p>The experience was very weird. It set off my “this is weird” alarms which made me step away from it.<p>The founder eventually went to prison for running a Ponzi scheme.<p>I think people very much want to belong to a group, and be told that the way they view the world is right. And there are plenty of people who are happy to tell you you’re right and you belong if you’ll just offer yourself up to them.
1. People can singularly hold views that seem radically different to the average person. Label them skeptics, crackpots, etc.<p>2. People can collectively hold views that seem radically different to the average person. Things like common religions, major political parties, etc don't fit in here: people may disagree with ideas in religions or politics, but the ideas themselves aren't radically different<p>Individuals of #1s and #2s cling to their beliefs and sometimes define themselves by those beliefs.<p>I'm assuming cults fit in #2, but are there #2s that aren't cults?
I’ve been with a couple of companies where the “corporate culture” thing was heavily preached by HR. You could call it cultish because of the endless training and mantra about mission and passion and competition and a whole slew of other words ending in -ion. It was only when I met others who had also left where we finally spoke easy and realized we had the same sentiments.
I’d say the author took a very large risk and gamble by engaging with these types of people. Many criminals and intelligence agencies employ the same tactic, one of them will be a very attractive woman, and while you’re distracted the male will rob you or follow you in your car to your house.
> A week later, they suggested we go to lunch again. Again, I was tempted to cut off contact, but I asked some friends and again they all said I was insane and imagining things.<p>Anon should first cutoff contact with those creeps then he should cut off contact with his friends.
Pretty common tactics.
When I was young I spent couple of months in UK. I was looking for a job and a girl come close to me, asking if I were Italian (she can recognize me by the accent and by the clothes) and suggesting me to bring my CV to local Staples that was looking for staff. She asked me where I live and we exchanged phone numbers (I thought this was interested on me).
We start messaging and after few messages, she told me that she was married and she had two kids, so I slowly stop the chat.
After 10 days, I was at home and she rang at my door with his husband a friend. They would like to invite me to a meeting in London, without providing much details. My family was part of a semi cult movement, so I am able to recognize to recognize those threats and the cult recruitment tactics.
Then I asked more details and after lot of debate they reveleade to be part of Jehova witness.
I told them that I was not interested and to don't try to recruit me again and I slam the door.
They come back other times, but I did not open the door, then I found some Jehova witness flairs on my postbox.
After I left and come back, my flatmate told me that they come several times looking for me and inviting him as well to the meetings.
> How do you draw the line between “sensibly taking into account how real people react” and “manipulative dark patterns to literally get people to join your cult”? Perhaps there is no clear boundary.<p>Hmmm, reminds me of the spectrum of the "Pickup Artist" tricks...
The person writing this seems really overly-agreeable. It's interesting to see that such people exist, and that the couple could pick him or her out from a crows like that. I guess cults really do have some practice and skill in that regard.
Many horrors of the world emerge directly from the belief that one owns the one true secret to happiness. The more banal reality that there are many enjoyable ways to live, doesn't attract followers.
Who is Dynomight? I have a hard time reading the work of anonymous people, because I have no frame of reference to interpret them.<p>May he looks like a guy who is easily led.
>1. They wanted to be friends.<p>>2. They wanted to have sex with me.<p>>3. They wanted me to join their religion.<p>I may know someone who writes like this. Very interested in how someone converts online comments into having sex with readers or getting them to join a religion, presumably one in which they also have sex with readers. They need to know how not to do that so they know what to avoid.
How did you discover that they were part of a cult? They just invited you to a group discussion and you didn't go to know if it's a really cult or just a bunch of people meeting and making new friends.
Reminds me of the time that I made the mistake of talking to some Midwest Worker's Association folks. Never, ever give a Communist your phone number unless they tell you what org they're recruiting for first. Those people are _persistent_.
It seems like the author was broadcasting a lack of boundaries / submissiveness. Ignoring all your intuitive warning bells and letting them continue to completely dictate the reality-framing let’s them slowly build illegitimate trust. They apparently didn’t quite get the pacing right and failed, but seems like they were well on the path.