Caravan Camper RV, Tool Sorter, Azgrand Internet Marketing, and Heartland Web Training - John Abert is NASTY and ABUSIVE

Posted on Monday, August 29th, 2011 at 2:28pm CDT by da3b6986

Company: Caravan Camper RV, Tool Sorter, Azgrand Internet Marketing, and Heartland Web Training

Location: 16 S Wichita Circle
Cherokee Village, AR, 72529, US


Category: Other

Other suspicious businesses: Caravan Camper RV, Tool Sorter, Azgrand Internet Marketing, and Heartland Web Training

Azgrand Internet Marketing

16 S Wichita Circle

Cherokee Village, AR 72529

870-257-5956 or toll free at 1-866-782-9355

[email protected]

John Abert, at Azgrand Internet Marketing, is an abusive person, here are some verifiable examples:

a) he ridicules people in both private and in public

b) he assumes you're a moron and that you don't know anything about the internet

c) he makes it known that you're just a peon and that he has all the knowledge

d) he takes action on your behalf without your consent

e) he ridicules you via e-mail then blocks your e-mail address so that you can't respond

f) expresses contempt for people who speak against him in public, but then he does the very same thing, he speaks against people in public

g) he engages in ad hominem attacks with ease

I would never engage with him and his unless he admits his faults and takes action to correct them.

Anybody want proof of his abuse e-mails? Just ask and you shall receive!



Post a Comment

8efc640a, 2011-08-29, 04:07PM CDT

And if the above email was not enough, this is his second email I received, after I blocked his first address. This borders on cyber stalking, a criminal offense. Does anyone else see the insanity creeping in, or is it just me? Look at any of my web sites. If anyone (except this guy) sees anything wrong or illegal, please let me know through the site form, so I can correct it! Again let the reader be the judge:


I'd like for you to publicly apologize for your assaulting behaviors given the context of your website, our discussion, and discussions with others, including but not limited to:

a) adding visitors to an e-mail list without said visitor's explicit knowledge/consent

b) claiming the clandestine use of someone's e-mail is 'standard procedure in any marketing'

c) claiming such clandestine use of someone's e-mail is 'automatic'

d) using names of (apparently) popular companies as if to intimidate, silence, marginalize, etc and/or to support some unsubstantiated/false/assaulting/etc assertion

e) using percentages as if to intimidate, silence, marginalize, etc and/or to support some unsubstantiated/false/assaulting/etc assertion

f) not providing visitors with clear and front and center verbiage summarizing expectations

g) calling a visitor's wish to leave, a 'loss' on their part - as if to show superiority, unnecessary control, mind ownership, an indifference towards visitors, etc

h) claiming you're not 'aggravated' but then proceed to write an e-mail with a clear tone of agitation/anger/hate/aggravation/anxiety/etc

i) claiming you're not 'aggravated' but then proceed to update a public web page with misleading information along with an agitated/anxious/etc tone

j) removing visitors from an e-mail list without said visitor's explicit request to do so

k) removing visitors from an e-mail list without said visitor's explicit request to do so, and then claiming said visitor should have requested such an action for removal him/herself

l) blocking e-mail address so as to inhibit further communications as if to say, 'my words are the last words, and you are now not allowed to respond to my last words'

m) discussing on a webpage about someone complaining about the number of pictures on a forum, and wished '...some people were man enough to contact me personally to give it, rather than make smart aleck remarks in public' (but, didn't I contact you privately, John?!? and, after I did that, what did you do, John? Well, John, you made 'smart aleck remarks in public'! but wait a minute, didn't you just complain about that behavior as if it was something not acceptable? or, is it that that kind of assaulting behavior is only acceptable for 'John', and only 'John'?!?)

Clearly, your behavior is incredibly assaulting. I am requesting that you make a public apology: e-mail, web, etc. If you don't, remember that I have the data to show that your behavior IS unequivocally and incredibly assaulting; and, if necessary, I have no problem in respectfully communicating my findings about you and yours to any concerned entity particularly if it comes to my attention that you are claiming to be a saint/a respectful person/a compassionate person/etc. Both you and I are accountable for our behaviors. I could potentially post a blog somewhere about your assaulting behavior; but I find that unnecessary and as unacceptable as your behavior; however, if your assaulting behavior continues relentlessly even after this private discussion, then you leave me with limited choices.

I am always open to engaging in a respectful discussion; we all can and do make mistakes; but, repeated assaults, particularly after being made clearly aware of such assaults, are never acceptable - as such, and at the very least, we can choose to respectfully disengage (so long as the behavior does NOT sufficiently harm any other).


8efc640a, 2011-08-29, 03:06PM CDT

Here is the very first email I got from this nut case. No signature, no identifier. Obviously, too much of a coward to reveal his name. Notice he didn't in the complaint above, either. I have been a profressional full-time marketer for over twelve years. I'll let my success and his letter speak for themselves. Let the reader be the judge, as follows:

hey John,

either I'm retarded* or you're retarded (possibly, both of us could certainly be retarded).

do explain to me (provide logic, reason, facts, etc) how you got from point A to point B:

Point A: 94-page book request via the webpage,

Point B: therefore such peons are forced into e-mail list without their explicit consent/knowledge

maybe the peon was clearly and explicitly made aware of such an email list but I, one peon, just hasn't seen such verbiage located front and center somewhere on the 94-page book request webform or it's just that my browser was hiding that verbiage.

*The use of the term 'retarded' is by no means used to degrade the mentally challenged who have severely damaged mental capacities; instead, I use the term to help/push people like you and I - whom are clearly not mentally challenged as described above - to think, to feel, to be respectful.

da3b6986, 2011-09-01, 04:04PM CDT

As I've expected, John Abert's assaults against me continue relentlessly. Following are only but a few more assaults I have sustained thus far (I keep finding new ones way too often <sigh>):

a) John Abert is calling me a 'nut case' (since when is relentless name calling acceptable?)

b) John Abert is calling me a 'coward' (since when is relentless name calling acceptable?)

c) John Abert claims he has 'been a profressional [sic] full-time marketer' (I see absolutely no evidence supporting this claim)

d) John Abert claims he has 'success' (I see absolutely no evidence supporting his claim of 'success')

e) John Abert has addressed my person with a supposedly endearing salutation in his SECOND assaulting e-mail to me (verbatim) as: "Dear 'D' (I have to assume that stands for Degenerate); I wasn't able to immediately find any common sources that would support using the word 'degenerate' in a sincere manner as in an endearing salutation, in contrast, many common sources confirm its use to generally connote a negative/degrading condition; eg, says, 'to fall below a normal or desirable level in physical, mental, or moral qualities'

f) thus far, on both of John Abert's replies to this matter dated Aug 29th, he has opted to NOT allow potential viewers to respond to him whereas in my case I have left that communication channel open for respectful communications having said that, could someone please explain to me what exactly is a 'coward'?!?

Would someone kindly provide a convincing argument* (for me and for the world) as to why anyone (and everyone) should accept these kinds of relentlessly assaulting behaviors (committed by John Abert or by any other similarly assaulting entity)?


*By 'argument', I mean it in a looser sense in that one should substantiate their position by using, for example, basic logic, basic reasoning along with sufficiently substantiated data; this is not a request for strict/formal argument.

da3b6986, 2011-10-27, 04:41PM CDT


Supposedly John Abert has unsubscribed my e-mail address from his subscription service back in August, 2011

However, just a few days ago, October, 2011, I've received another subscription-based e-mail communication.

So, you say that I should simply unsubscribe, right? Well, I can't, b/c he already blocked my e-mail address way back in August (see his response below from some time ago admitting such an action).

How would you like if I forced some internet-based action/behavior onto you - which you neither asked for nor appreciate - but then also blocked your attempts to communicate with me via e-mail to request that I cease and desist such a behavior/action?

At the very least, I would think that you would question my ethics.

Once again, anyone is free to request 'hard' evidence of John Abert's abusive behaviors.


64073f3b, 2012-06-22, 08:56AM CDT

This is a joke, right? It has to be a joke. If it's not, you are INSANE. Please contact a respected mental health professional and get the help you desperately need.

Either way, I really enjoyed this and hope this crazy story will continue.

Post a Comment