|
In Reply to: Re: Therapist for the Worried Well? posted by CB, aka Pretender on March 02, 2006 at 20:02:20:
CB/Pretender:
Oh, yeah. I meant to repost my answer to them here, as well. David C did appear to have begun to give me an acceptable response; we'll see--he did repost the guidelines saying NDN wasn't responsible for the opinions of their posters. That's OK--I wasn't going to sue for psychological damages, or anything, I just want to retain the right to insist on the integrity of others, if I can make the effort, so can they.
Reposted below.
Sincerely,
OT2 (OldtimerToo)
_________________________________________________
Re: OT2
Posted By: OT2 <Send E-Mail>
Date: Thursday, 2 March 2006, at 5:33 p.m.
In Response To: OT2 (David C)
David C:
You said:
> Your post in the thread below was deleted.
> WHY, well it was a mean, mocking post and so
> was the picture, I don’t see ridiculing
> someone as funny or a joke. Joel has been
> banned till April so he couldn’t have
> answered you anyway. Any more posts mocking
> Joel will be deleted. This is really getting
> old, no more warnings.
My intention on the wording of the post was quotes about people's opinions about Joel, and were in quotes; some of them were admittedly mine.
I have noticed that what is called "discretion" on the opening page of "Open House" has consistently been in favor of allowing HUGE amounts of "...offensive, rude, or nonsensical posts...", in particular by Joel, nearly EVERY DAY FOR MONTHS, to be posted without challenge.
I had made myself vulnerable, after exhausting what I perceived to be very long-suffering attempts to reach Joel (see P.S.), about the fact that it is EVIL to believe in and quote Mo'; ALL of whose quotes are "...offensive, rude, or nonsensical posts...".
You historically have let him continuously "run his head", IMO, in a way that was, to me, extremely "disruptive" to what was generally understood to be the business of the board by the general posters. Your position is: "At the sole discretion of The Network Host or Forum Coordinator, disruptive individuals may have their ability to post messages on a Forum suspended for a definite or indefinite period."
My question is this: How is favorably directly quoting David Berg's "Mo' Letters", rather than, say, publishing entire letters with a caveat as to their content, as ExFam does, NOT "disruptive"? Why should Joel EVER be allowed to do so; for goodness sake (literally!)?
AS I have stated before, placing Mo' Quotes OF ANY KIND on a TF exer board in a PRO-BERG MANNER, is the moral equivalent, given the history of suicides directly related to the topic, of placing the writings of "Mein Kampf", or Nazi concentration camp communiques directly before the eyes of surviving victims of those camps. IT IS THE SAME THING.
I DO applaud the position you (finally) took on Joel, by what you said about the XFamily posting on him as a believer in, and recently a prolific quoter, of nasty old Mo'.
I suppose that I wanted to make an indirect point that you tolerate subject matter on a demonstrably subjective basis.
When I expressed my history of fighting suicide ideation over the years, a common exer topic, I received a considerable amount of comfort and encouragement, from yourself and others. One of the others was Carmel, and it was clear that she did not share Joel's unalloyed hatred for me. Gal 4:16 says "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth"? Joel's reactions to me and others were purely his own choice, and proceeded EXACTLY along those lines.
Others, as I did, told him the truth. He expressed a resultant hatred for each of us, with SPECIFICALLY the methods you wrote would bring action on your part, and you repeatedly allowed him to do so. Why?
He just mocked me immediately following my suicide ideation disclosure. You let him rant on, in apparent violation of your own policies. Why?
Reiterating, the message I wrote simply pointed out that Joel believes in and quotes Mo' Letters, as the page at XFamily did.
I went on to say that I did not furnish that information to them, that I wanted to NOT RESPOND anymore to Joel, unless I felt I should at a later time, and I quoted other posters', including my own, assessments of his behavior, similar to XFamily's, and said that I was tired of communicating on the whole matter!
It was not intended to be particularly "mean" and/or "mocking". I perceived it to be along the same lines as the XFamily article.
Are YOU, and the NDN board embarrassed by your inconsistent position on Joel, as evidenced by whom and what you have deleted, historically, as I have pointed out? If you are, you'll probably delete this, and embarrass yourselves; not me.
I won't bother with you as a dependable or trustworthy group of friends anymore; I'll just write you off as I have MovingOn, and some of the time GeneXers, as a place where I am judged and censured and pseudo-omniciently edited, in an inconsistent, and prejudicial manner, and will conclude that NDN IS its OWN subculture, and pretty much like, say, JPUSA/Chicago--they are basically still stuck in the communally-anchored "hippier-than-thou" past.
Sad; even tragicomic. Like I said about Joel--"Whatever". I'm tired of dealing with a "pearls before swine" situation in his case.
The picture? That was too much on my part. I do apologize, again, and it was inconsistent on my part with my previous apology regarding Joel. I am sorry.
But, in establishing NDN, you HAVE set yourselves up as a "Christian authority" of sorts; like it or not. And, a LOT of us exers cycle in and out of maladjustments of one sort or the other.
If I can have patience with YOUR inconsistencies, again, as I perceive them (and you SHOULD allow that--you CERTAINLY do with Joel), you should have with mine.
Otherwise, you ARE, unarguably, partial.
As to the photo, I was wrong, there, and think it was probably a jab back at Joel, "rendering evil for evil", for mocking me after I disclosed unemployment, depression, suicide ideation, and so forth.
A catalyst was your inaction exactly at this juncture; though--get real.
I will include the photo from Xfamily, below.
Sincerely,
OT2 (OldtimerToo)
P.S My exhaustive attempt to get others' help for Joel, and their "wonderful" reactions (Acheick and Susie applauded my attempts! Thanks--you're my real sisters!)"
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7680.htm
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7684.htm
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7685.htm
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7691.htm
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7693.htm
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7694.htm
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7701.htm
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7712.htm
http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/jrny/posts/7714.htm
Quoting you regarding the following picture:
"The picture in the article you are talking about has been in our picture section for years. Joel knew it was there. What is the big deal?"
The URL: http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Joel_Wordsworth
