|
In Reply to: Re: To Posters Like "afriend" posted by Swede on May 16, 2006 at 06:24:24:
Swede:
There is, of course, a limit to trying to answer "stupid" posts. One answer is enough. "afriend", and "Smiley" have shown themselves to not be content with that.
Endlessly allowing them to state the same thing repeatedly is not a servce to anyone; including them.
An adult should be answered like an adult, even if it is their cult's modus operandi to infantilize all its followers thinking endlessly, and to replaced their natural God-given thinking and reasoning capacity with quotes by false prophets, and hired gun PR experts, and cult apologists. Even if it's "baby lock step", it's still lock step, and should be pointed out.
I do join other exers in welcoming TFI members/sympathizers to read and post, but not to violate board rules, and certainly not to waste everybody's time with "stupidity" as I defined it.
The message of this board is really quite simple. Posters intent on expressing their "stupidities" (again, as I defined them with the online dictionary quote) endlessly, historically ignite reactions which are also not within board posting parameters.
I am for a reasoned exchange from both sides. Some "pro-board" posts, if you will, are not reasonable, but MOST pro-TFI expressions speak for themselves, and are usually childish, poorly-reasoned, accusative in a red-herring fashion, and subjects which would elicit "gravitas" from anyone in the world except THEM only get infantilized and pointless ridicule as an "answer".
Like I said, that is definitionally "stupid".
I, CB and Moonshiner, to name just a few, tend to point those TFI-like gaffs out immediately.
We do not feel we should put up with, again, "stupidities" as such, or just lie down and allow TFI propaganda to be endlessly spewed out--they have their worldwide propaganda machine, including MyConclusion.com, and so forth, for that tripe.
TFI, at all levels, and its propaganda, pretentions, and lies, as well as its proven historic criminality and evasion of prosecution, is a given, here. That is a grave subject, for any sensible and reasonable person. Cult robots don't like to have that pointed out, especially in a personal manner which interupts their "cult stupidity" thinking and evasion of personal responsibility.
When "afriend", "Smiley", and so forth come here, we have already put up with their assininities sufficiently, and should not be expected to continue to do so.
Yes, we hope for their exit from TFI.
No, we do not and will not forever identify them unfairly with all of its practices as individuals.
Yes, we believe that TFI is rotten to the core, and even unredeemable as an organization, despite ANY of its desperate PR put-ons.
At http://www.exfamily.org/chatbbs/genx/posts/26818.htm, Moonshiner defined this type of communication on Deb's part.
To her credit, during the time she was posting here, Deb did make an effort to change a bit, and departed, if only slightly, from the TFI-trained knee-jerk response.
But, before that, as Moonshiner pointed out, he notes:
"When I challenged her as to why she keeps coming to this site, she responded:
"Anyway, as everyone (except you, obviously) can see, I'm just trying to mess up (see, I didn't swear this time!) your head and fortunately for me, you keep falling for it. How fun."
She has made other similar comments and has also criticised some posters for posting anonymously. Whenever she's been confronted with reasonable arguments she either rudely dismisses them, ignores them, responds with accusations against us or claims that she's only here to joke around and mess with our heads. All in all, she has shown a lack of awareness about the purpose of this board, about the people who post here, and has imo breached the spirit of the rules of this board. She's admitted that she's only here to "mess up" our heads and is enjoying doing that. Didn't Smiley get banned for something similar?
I have accused Deb of muddying the waters where her dad is concerned and I stand by that because now she has admitted that's why she's here. It's certainly not to give us the truth about her dad. In her most recent posts she reveals that she really doesn't have a clue about her father's status vis-a-vis TF, contrary to what she originally claimed."
That's what I am talking about.
Sincerely,
OT2 (OldtimerToo)
