CarderPlanet
Professional
In this issue we will talk about the required level of social engineering to get money back for packages from online stores. These tips are useful in other areas as well. The main thing is practice!
Let's go
1. "Ask for more and get what you need."
The secret to the success of this method is that your second request will seem very easy to implement when compared to the first. Ask for something completely impossible to be refused, then put forward an adequate request. In combination with the material from the above links, it will definitely "shoot".
For example, if you want the JV agent to issue a Refund and not a Replace, then just tell him, “Can you issue me a Refund today? I urgently need money for treatment. " Accordingly, they will refuse you and write that this is impossible, then immediately ask: "Could you, in that case, right now submit my application for a refund?" The employee of the joint venture will not have any offers to issue you a Replace.
2. "Adequacy is boring."
The essence of the method: the first request is unusual and may not relate to the essence of the matter, and the second is normal. The whole point is that a person is discouraged and will not immediately answer "no", and then catch him "lukewarm."
For example, if you “got it” to the Police Report, but you don't fucking need it, then ask the support service to provide you with samples, numbers and all the bullshit, since you broke your leg yesterday and cannot move. And “heal” that life is shit ?
Thus, you will gain confidence in the joint venture, and perhaps you will be able to "sort out" the situation.
3. The classic carrot and stick.
That is, first you need to "shashmarize" the interlocutor, well, and then "throw" an easy solution to problems.
For example, we inform the Aliexpress seller that you are going to unsubscribe from the joint venture, to the anti-counterfeiting department, send a report to the store, etc. Well, then offer him a solution to problems with the help of compensation.
A more everyday and interesting, in my opinion, example: you can tell your friend the following: “You know, when I was driving your car, I heard very strange sounds that I even thought that your car was about to stall. But then, you won't believe it, I realized that it was just a radio receiver - it's funny, isn't it? ”Pause and wait until your friend comes to his senses, and then say:" I just thought, by the way, do you mind if I borrow your car for a couple more days? "
4. Feelings of guilt as a way of manipulation.
More often applicable when using arguments, a la injury to health or a broken product. Let them feel guilty about a bad product, poor quality workmanship, etc. Phrases like: “No, it's okay, that's exactly what I expected (a),” can work, awakening feelings of guilt.
5. "Give on the paw."
You give me a positive confirmation of the dispute, and I give you good reviews and an increase in your rating. Not everyone agrees, but still. Create the illusion that you are doing a good deed for the other person in return for a favor on their part. (On Aliexpress, they can issue an account ban if the seller is a "nephew")
6. "Try on the role of the victim."
Continuation of method # 4. Play the role of a kind and selfless person, doomed to suffer for all sins in the world. And phrases like: “I can't even imagine what I could have done wrong”, “Nothing, I'm already used to it” will add drama and make the interlocutors indifferent fiends who do not want to help.
7. "Logic never hurts."
The manipulator does not always play on feelings. There are people for whom rationality is paramount. We discard emotions and act differently. Quite seriously and calmly bring the person to the evidence of benefits not only for you, when fulfilling your request.
Give at least three logical facts. All your behavior should show that the implementation of your request is a single logical and reasonable act. Instill a sense of awkwardness and stupidity in someone who does not share your point of view.
If you are suspected of using manipulation, we make a “brick face” and broadcast something like “I can't believe I could hear that from you!” So that the “especially suspicious” person feels guilty for his distrust. Remember, at least once you confess, you will lose influence over a person for good. Observe this unapplicable truth and enjoy your success.
Really important
Firstly, SPEECH! Politeness and literacy - with this approach, you will seem more convincing and it will be more difficult for you to refuse. So, if your language is not particularly "hung up", it is better to think over the whole dialogue in advance, so as not to make elementary mistakes and not look ridiculous.
Secondly - CONFIDENCE! People are more likely to trust a confident person. If you are confident in yourself, it will be easier to instill confidence in the victim that all your actions are needed first of all by her, and not by you.
Thirdly, EAT QUIET ... Haste in our business can only interfere. Better to work for performance.
In - fourth, ROTATE YOUR OWN LINE. Agree with all "no", but lead to the fact that there is no "yes". The trick is that by agreeing to all "no" you become "your" person. Sympathize, be on the "wave", but quietly "pull the blanket over yourself." (For example: they do not want to return money for the goods to you, write that you agree with their judgment, but at the same time you are the injured party, which requires little service from the support service).
In addition to these tips useful possession of some basic techniques:
1. The fish swam. More effective, of course, when talking on the phone, but it can also be applied in correspondence. Become a bore, clingy. The person will be ready to agree to anything just to get rid of you.
2. Technique of giving. Before starting communication, mentally imagine that you are giving your interlocutor an expensive gift, a wad of money, no matter what, the main thing is from the heart. This will help you win over the person.
3. What is good and what is bad. An exercise that helps you to quickly come up with excuses on the go. To make it clear, here's an example:
It's good that I did not receive the goods, because I still could not give it to my loved one ...
I could not give this gift to a loved one and this is bad, but I saved my money and now I can spend it on treating my health ...
With the help of this money, I can heal my health, this is Good, but since you refuse to reimburse me for the funds, this will not happen and this is Bad.
Phrases that promote better persuasion will be very helpful:
1. Have you ever made an exception?
For many sellers, it is in their best interest to work with you. The rating for them is in the first place, and in order not to spoil it, they are ready to make concessions.
2. If I were you, I would feel the same way.
A phrase that helps to "get into trust." The person will decide that you are kind, clean and honest. And voila! A fish on a hook.
3. Because!
The reasoning behind your actions gives you a certain authority. And most people are designed in such a way that they are used to obeying the leader unconditionally.
4. The ladder of consent.
The point of this technique is to smoothly lead to agreement when answering the main question, by answering the previous simple questions. Here is an example from the vastness of the Internet.
(How to call a girl out on a date: You won't immediately ask: "Can you give me your number?", "Maybe we will walk on Wednesday at 8 pm?" Salsa dance? "And since now almost everyone has heard about it, she replied: "Yes, of course." Further, I asked: "Do you think you would like to dance salsa?", she thought and answered: "I think yes, of course, I like to dance. "I continued:" Great, do you want to come with me somehow? "Number? This wednesday at 8 pm I'm going to a salsa class, and then there's a dance party, we can go there.")
I also liked the techniques used by the manipulator during a discussion or dispute:
Over-informing. The manipulator tries to bring a lot of arguments in order to confuse the opponent. Not only is it simply impossible to compare these arguments in response, but also the information channels of the interlocutor do not withstand such a load. When you have only one, but a real argument, and the manipulator has dozens of them, the psyche may not stand it, and the people around them also see it as a victory for the manipulator. The opponent can easily lose the main idea.
Avoiding discussion. Demonstrative use of resentment: "It is impossible to discuss serious issues with you", "Your behavior makes it impossible to continue the conversation." Often used when the manipulator has run out of arguments. Such provocation of conflict, as it were, puts the search for truth out of the brackets. Indeed, the truth is not important now that you are using SI for personal gain.
Reading in hearts. The manipulator does not comment on your arguments, he appeals to why you are bringing them, as if trying to understand the reasons for your arguments, and not the essence of what was said. For example: "You only say this because you have to listen to me, but not help me." It doesn't matter if the opponent is right or not, it is important to bring up the motives of his words for discussion.
Change of emphasis in statements. If the opponent cites a particular example, a refutation is expressed that this cannot be the general picture. Conversely, the big picture is not always private. At the same time, a logical error in the argument of the manipulator is that its examples can be exceptions or atypical examples.
Incomplete refutation. Why break all the steel arguments of your opponent when you can find the most vulnerable and thereby prove that everyone else is the same? For example, bring the news of the unfair act of this store to your customers.
Demanding an unambiguous answer. The object of manipulation is invited to give an accurate and clear answer using phrases such as: "do not evade", "tell it straight." Despite the fact that this technique seems to be honest, principled and a sign of decisiveness, in fact, the manipulator wants to get a clear "yes" or "no" to a question that requires a detailed answer. Not all questions in the world can be answered unequivocally "yes", even if you mostly tend to accept the argument.
Building on a past statement. A brilliant example of manipulative art. The manipulator cites the opponent's past statement in a slightly modified interpretation and requires an explanation. This has an impact not only on the surrounding public, but also on the opponent himself - it seems like his words are quoted, but so twisted that it is necessary to understand where the substitution took place - and at that time the manipulator requires an explanation ... If there is enough time for an argument, you can calmly detect the substitution and expose the manipulation, but if the time is limited, the opponent is defeated and shows himself to be a liar.
Growing demands. The manipulator so demands to admit the perfect trifle that the opponent gives in because the argument is unimportant. But then the stakes rise and the manipulator demands acceptance of other claims. And we know that it is worth conceding in something small, then an avalanche of demands will follow.
Let's go
1. "Ask for more and get what you need."
The secret to the success of this method is that your second request will seem very easy to implement when compared to the first. Ask for something completely impossible to be refused, then put forward an adequate request. In combination with the material from the above links, it will definitely "shoot".
For example, if you want the JV agent to issue a Refund and not a Replace, then just tell him, “Can you issue me a Refund today? I urgently need money for treatment. " Accordingly, they will refuse you and write that this is impossible, then immediately ask: "Could you, in that case, right now submit my application for a refund?" The employee of the joint venture will not have any offers to issue you a Replace.
2. "Adequacy is boring."
The essence of the method: the first request is unusual and may not relate to the essence of the matter, and the second is normal. The whole point is that a person is discouraged and will not immediately answer "no", and then catch him "lukewarm."
For example, if you “got it” to the Police Report, but you don't fucking need it, then ask the support service to provide you with samples, numbers and all the bullshit, since you broke your leg yesterday and cannot move. And “heal” that life is shit ?
Thus, you will gain confidence in the joint venture, and perhaps you will be able to "sort out" the situation.
3. The classic carrot and stick.
That is, first you need to "shashmarize" the interlocutor, well, and then "throw" an easy solution to problems.
For example, we inform the Aliexpress seller that you are going to unsubscribe from the joint venture, to the anti-counterfeiting department, send a report to the store, etc. Well, then offer him a solution to problems with the help of compensation.
A more everyday and interesting, in my opinion, example: you can tell your friend the following: “You know, when I was driving your car, I heard very strange sounds that I even thought that your car was about to stall. But then, you won't believe it, I realized that it was just a radio receiver - it's funny, isn't it? ”Pause and wait until your friend comes to his senses, and then say:" I just thought, by the way, do you mind if I borrow your car for a couple more days? "
4. Feelings of guilt as a way of manipulation.
More often applicable when using arguments, a la injury to health or a broken product. Let them feel guilty about a bad product, poor quality workmanship, etc. Phrases like: “No, it's okay, that's exactly what I expected (a),” can work, awakening feelings of guilt.
5. "Give on the paw."
You give me a positive confirmation of the dispute, and I give you good reviews and an increase in your rating. Not everyone agrees, but still. Create the illusion that you are doing a good deed for the other person in return for a favor on their part. (On Aliexpress, they can issue an account ban if the seller is a "nephew")
6. "Try on the role of the victim."
Continuation of method # 4. Play the role of a kind and selfless person, doomed to suffer for all sins in the world. And phrases like: “I can't even imagine what I could have done wrong”, “Nothing, I'm already used to it” will add drama and make the interlocutors indifferent fiends who do not want to help.
7. "Logic never hurts."
The manipulator does not always play on feelings. There are people for whom rationality is paramount. We discard emotions and act differently. Quite seriously and calmly bring the person to the evidence of benefits not only for you, when fulfilling your request.
Give at least three logical facts. All your behavior should show that the implementation of your request is a single logical and reasonable act. Instill a sense of awkwardness and stupidity in someone who does not share your point of view.
If you are suspected of using manipulation, we make a “brick face” and broadcast something like “I can't believe I could hear that from you!” So that the “especially suspicious” person feels guilty for his distrust. Remember, at least once you confess, you will lose influence over a person for good. Observe this unapplicable truth and enjoy your success.
Really important
Firstly, SPEECH! Politeness and literacy - with this approach, you will seem more convincing and it will be more difficult for you to refuse. So, if your language is not particularly "hung up", it is better to think over the whole dialogue in advance, so as not to make elementary mistakes and not look ridiculous.
Secondly - CONFIDENCE! People are more likely to trust a confident person. If you are confident in yourself, it will be easier to instill confidence in the victim that all your actions are needed first of all by her, and not by you.
Thirdly, EAT QUIET ... Haste in our business can only interfere. Better to work for performance.
In - fourth, ROTATE YOUR OWN LINE. Agree with all "no", but lead to the fact that there is no "yes". The trick is that by agreeing to all "no" you become "your" person. Sympathize, be on the "wave", but quietly "pull the blanket over yourself." (For example: they do not want to return money for the goods to you, write that you agree with their judgment, but at the same time you are the injured party, which requires little service from the support service).
In addition to these tips useful possession of some basic techniques:
1. The fish swam. More effective, of course, when talking on the phone, but it can also be applied in correspondence. Become a bore, clingy. The person will be ready to agree to anything just to get rid of you.
2. Technique of giving. Before starting communication, mentally imagine that you are giving your interlocutor an expensive gift, a wad of money, no matter what, the main thing is from the heart. This will help you win over the person.
3. What is good and what is bad. An exercise that helps you to quickly come up with excuses on the go. To make it clear, here's an example:
It's good that I did not receive the goods, because I still could not give it to my loved one ...
I could not give this gift to a loved one and this is bad, but I saved my money and now I can spend it on treating my health ...
With the help of this money, I can heal my health, this is Good, but since you refuse to reimburse me for the funds, this will not happen and this is Bad.
Phrases that promote better persuasion will be very helpful:
1. Have you ever made an exception?
For many sellers, it is in their best interest to work with you. The rating for them is in the first place, and in order not to spoil it, they are ready to make concessions.
2. If I were you, I would feel the same way.
A phrase that helps to "get into trust." The person will decide that you are kind, clean and honest. And voila! A fish on a hook.
3. Because!
The reasoning behind your actions gives you a certain authority. And most people are designed in such a way that they are used to obeying the leader unconditionally.
4. The ladder of consent.
The point of this technique is to smoothly lead to agreement when answering the main question, by answering the previous simple questions. Here is an example from the vastness of the Internet.
(How to call a girl out on a date: You won't immediately ask: "Can you give me your number?", "Maybe we will walk on Wednesday at 8 pm?" Salsa dance? "And since now almost everyone has heard about it, she replied: "Yes, of course." Further, I asked: "Do you think you would like to dance salsa?", she thought and answered: "I think yes, of course, I like to dance. "I continued:" Great, do you want to come with me somehow? "Number? This wednesday at 8 pm I'm going to a salsa class, and then there's a dance party, we can go there.")
I also liked the techniques used by the manipulator during a discussion or dispute:
Over-informing. The manipulator tries to bring a lot of arguments in order to confuse the opponent. Not only is it simply impossible to compare these arguments in response, but also the information channels of the interlocutor do not withstand such a load. When you have only one, but a real argument, and the manipulator has dozens of them, the psyche may not stand it, and the people around them also see it as a victory for the manipulator. The opponent can easily lose the main idea.
Avoiding discussion. Demonstrative use of resentment: "It is impossible to discuss serious issues with you", "Your behavior makes it impossible to continue the conversation." Often used when the manipulator has run out of arguments. Such provocation of conflict, as it were, puts the search for truth out of the brackets. Indeed, the truth is not important now that you are using SI for personal gain.
Reading in hearts. The manipulator does not comment on your arguments, he appeals to why you are bringing them, as if trying to understand the reasons for your arguments, and not the essence of what was said. For example: "You only say this because you have to listen to me, but not help me." It doesn't matter if the opponent is right or not, it is important to bring up the motives of his words for discussion.
Change of emphasis in statements. If the opponent cites a particular example, a refutation is expressed that this cannot be the general picture. Conversely, the big picture is not always private. At the same time, a logical error in the argument of the manipulator is that its examples can be exceptions or atypical examples.
Incomplete refutation. Why break all the steel arguments of your opponent when you can find the most vulnerable and thereby prove that everyone else is the same? For example, bring the news of the unfair act of this store to your customers.
Demanding an unambiguous answer. The object of manipulation is invited to give an accurate and clear answer using phrases such as: "do not evade", "tell it straight." Despite the fact that this technique seems to be honest, principled and a sign of decisiveness, in fact, the manipulator wants to get a clear "yes" or "no" to a question that requires a detailed answer. Not all questions in the world can be answered unequivocally "yes", even if you mostly tend to accept the argument.
Building on a past statement. A brilliant example of manipulative art. The manipulator cites the opponent's past statement in a slightly modified interpretation and requires an explanation. This has an impact not only on the surrounding public, but also on the opponent himself - it seems like his words are quoted, but so twisted that it is necessary to understand where the substitution took place - and at that time the manipulator requires an explanation ... If there is enough time for an argument, you can calmly detect the substitution and expose the manipulation, but if the time is limited, the opponent is defeated and shows himself to be a liar.
Growing demands. The manipulator so demands to admit the perfect trifle that the opponent gives in because the argument is unimportant. But then the stakes rise and the manipulator demands acceptance of other claims. And we know that it is worth conceding in something small, then an avalanche of demands will follow.
