I hurried back to Guangzhou from Cixi, Ningbo, and after finally returning to the company, I quickly took leave to visit my wife. Contrary to my expectations of a terrible state, my wife was not yet weak to the point of being fragile. At that time, she was arguing with her parents because her grandfather's sudden situation coincided with her own issues, making her feel neglected.

Later, I accompanied my wife to the Red Cross Hospital for an abortion procedure, but nothing came out, which made us realize that the unexpected incident had actually resolved itself.

As for me, I also had to go to the provincial second hospital from time to time to check on the recovery of my fracture. So, I hardly went to work for a few days, and during this time, all the employees on business trips were gathered at the company for a month of technical training, which I, due to my circumstances, of course could not attend.

During the time spent with my family, they all questioned my job, one saying that the salary was low and I had to travel so far, that even a restaurant waiter could earn that little. Another thought I was not valued in the company and believed I had no reason to stay, and more importantly, they thought business trips were not good, with too many risk factors, especially after my fracture, which increased their worries.

I thought I should do my best before leaving, right? So I made a special trip back to the company and began to write down my invitation experiences, forming a document to share in the company's business group, hoping it could help others. My colleagues welcomed this action, but the boss thought I was causing trouble, which left me quite puzzled.

Later, the boss's brother, who is the CEO of the company, found me to talk. He said that everyone has their own ideas, and the experiences I wrote were only effective for me, possibly interfering with others' thoughts and actions. Although I didn't quite agree with his words, I didn't voice any objections. Changing a person's way of thinking is very difficult, and if we argued, it would lead to a theoretical confrontation, which would not benefit either side.

However, he also recognized that I was a talent and hoped I could continue working at the company, which of course meant continuing to travel for business. After a very torturous process, I could only say that I had to listen to my family's opinions and temporarily resign, observing the situation for three months.

Given the company's situation at that time, I thought the best arrangement for me would be to be responsible for online sales, as I was more skilled in that area than most. However, the company continued to recruit externally. The company leaders did not bring it up, and I did not want to propose it myself, simply because the boss was the kind of person who believed in seeing is believing, and I naturally could not immediately show him my capabilities. I could only be sure that I was much stronger than the people he was hiring. But this self-proving process required certain authority, and obtaining that authority had to be seen by the boss, so this became an impossible paradox.

The reason I insisted on going to the company with my injury, opening my laptop, and struggling to type out my experiences was to help some colleagues, yet being told this way was also one of the reasons I didn't want to make suggestions in this regard.

Of course, the CEO's other words also made me abandon some ideas. He said that there was a cost for him to come to the company every day, so if I didn't want to continue, I could bring it up. What he didn't know was that compared to the time I spent coming for a day or half a day, my original intention and wish were not just that little salary. After all, the salary was not high; how much could I earn in a day or half a day? From this perspective, he thought the value I was supposed to contribute was less than half a day's or a day's salary. He saw the cost but did not see the potential changes I could bring to the company. I also knew that arguing about this was meaningless, so I did not voice any objections but quickly made the decision to reduce or minimize my presence at the company, keeping costs to a minimum.

However, the very good evaluations from the agents about me are an undeniable fact, so he still hoped I could return to the company and work alongside them in the future. In response to his sincerity, I decided to give back.

After I left the company, I sent him a message within three months to check in, but he did not respond. Although I did not know the specific reason, it also cut off my plans to serve the company again.

Later, I thought about it, and this is actually a normal phenomenon. Because for the company's personnel, although they added many clients on WeChat, they did not have the awareness of achieving service upgrades through WeChat marketing, nor did they have successful experiences in this area, so they never considered achieving good results through social networks. In their minds, they deeply believed that only on-site investment promotion meetings were effective, and everything else was impossible. So, he might think that WeChat communication was of no use or sincerity, and that on-site communication was the correct approach. Perhaps it was this mindset that caused him to miss the window for me to serve the company again. Of course, compared to this matter, perhaps missing more opportunities for performance improvement is the biggest loss for the platform.

Between the strong and the weak, it is not the weak who should first show sincerity, but the strong. However, in reality, many people get this order wrong. For example, migrant workers go to work, but the contractor demands to withhold their wages for three months, and then asks the migrant workers to show sincerity first, leading to situations where the contractor runs away. In this relationship, the contractor is clearly in the category of the strong, while the migrant workers are in the category of the weak. Many unfortunate events in society occur because the weak are required to show sincerity first, while the strong do not adhere to agreements.

Therefore, in my case, the reason I ultimately parted ways with the platform was that the platform, as the strong party, did not show enough sincerity while first requiring me, the weak party, to show sincerity. Having enough experience, I naturally would not accept this logic.

In the past, many years ago, as a member of the weak, I also required myself to show sincerity first, but often it was the strong who ultimately benefited, causing me psychological harm. What can the weak do? So, in this process, as the weak party, I had to require the strong party to show sincerity first. I would rather not cooperate than break this rule.

Imagine, the benefits the strong party gives you might be just a drop in the bucket for them, but for the weak party, it could be the basis for giving their all. Therefore, many platforms do not perform well, not because society lacks talent, but because they, as the strong party, seem to have impure motives from the beginning, trying to fully protect their own interests and completely shift the risks to the weak party.

So, today I deeply understand why some people with insufficient abilities demand good treatment, which undoubtedly is the best way for the weak party to protect their own interests. Although I have always believed in having genuine abilities, I still think their awareness of rules is commendable.