Marvin
You are spot on. Thank you fo aptly saying exactly whati've been trying to, badly. Your comments are a refreshing change to read.
Be prepared for the peanut gallery mentality though,.
Constructive feedback for AAWA leadership (IMHO)
by besty 141 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
smiddy
In hindsight we could all have done better than we did ....Who of us here have never regretted what we have done....We are all imperfect and make mistakes.....Take the rafter out of your own eye before pointing the finger at the splinter in your neighbours eye
We are all made in GODS image....blame him
This is a discussion forum...and we are discussing it...points of veiws are made and we either say yay or nay , no need to flog a dead horse , lets get on with life.
smiddy
-
besty
hey Marvin - thanks for weighing in with your thoughts. Just to clarify what I meant by solo acts. I assumed (wrongly) that this audience would get what I meant by solo in the context of my original post and subject line. I should have been less subtle - the distinction between front of house efforts and back-office projects was obvious to me.
This is a front of house thread. AAWA appear to have started front of house - they chose not to build a proven, enduring structure in the offline world which could really help people - and then let it grow naturally. They chose to allow almost 800 people to be added to their FaceBook group without permission or controls in place. This is called astroturfing - fake grassroots - and they were called out on it. (Whether FaceBook is ever going to be a viable way to help faders is another conversation. There is a reason forums and static content websites have survived the test of time.)
AAWA's front of house digital presence appears to be the focus, unlike the projects you describe - so it seems you have some oranges and I have some apples to compare here. The back-office work you describe is truly amazing and the volunteers who make it possible deserve much credit. If they choose to stay low-key then they can't expect (or wish for) public praise or public criticism - right? You have my email address and I didn't know about the library project until now - why not? <---- rhetorical question
Having volunteered with Randy for 3 years I know that back-office collaboration is helpful, but not essential. He has added his 0.04 on this thread already and seems to agree with my sentiments. To some extent he survives with the help of volunteers. He is quietly working in the background on a relaunch of Freeminds.org with the help of volunteers. That website helps tens of thousands of people each and every month and has done for decades now. But, visible stuff gets done by the man (or woman) with the vision and desire and capability and bloody-mindedness to give birth to something tangible. If you can attract some help along the way, then great, if not - you will do it anyways. This is the bit I'm not convinced is best done by a committee of egos - lets be honest here - egos and committees don't mix.
Myspace did not thrive whilst FaceBook succeeded off the charts - why? Real identity is a huge part of this - personal accountability seems to be critical to long-term success. Randy Watters, Paul Grundy, Simon Green, Barbara Anderson - all real people with identity that is clear - people know who they are dealing with, if that is important to them. Not pseudonym characters leading committees with acronyms for a description. (AJWRB is the exception that proves the rule possibly - in that case a back-office collabarative effort that happened to have a website, not the tail wagging the dog). If you want to build a library nobody gives a shit who you are - if you want to build a community it becomes very important.
I don't for a second doubt the personal integrity of the founders of AAWA - we are all on a similar page here. The intention of my thread was to give them my humble opinion :-) if they are still on JWN, that is.
-
ÁrbolesdeArabia
Marvin I don't think any Jehovah Witness has spent the amount of time researching JW doctrine in the capacity you did. Once upon a time, in the knows of the Kingdom Halls you were considered our "Last Hope" to reconcile all the mad doctrines the Slave was developing.
How ironic, a JW is punished for digging deep into the treasures of the Bible and told to enjoy the stale dried out bread our Organization has tried to pass off as Spiritual Manna for decades. Most everyone who reads your materials never denies your scholarly style, sincerity of heart you pour into each article or topic will all your mental energies. Thank You, for all your hard work Marvin! I am not sure the radical name the AAWA is using will cut it in our political correct social climate, things are different and people are afraid to make a stand.
-
Paralipomenon
I don't doubt that Cedars is a good person, I just feel that he needs more empathy for the group that he wants to help.
From reviewing his website, he has a very much "in your face" style. It works well for an expose but doesn't work well for someone recovering from abuse of a high control organization.
In regard for the name AAWA the post was made in their FAQ that if you don't like the name, you are a Watchtower sympathizer. As well as for the issue with Facebook, for people who were outed, being told that they weren't is just insulting.
There does seem to be an escalating trend to demonize all things that Cedars has done which I don't agree with. Like Martin highlighted, he is a good person. However he is not an empathetic person and that is really hurting his cause right now.
To help victims of abuse you need empathy to understand that every person experienced it differently. Some walked out with their head held high, others remain in for sake of maintaining a relationship with their family, others may be fragmented emotionally from physical or mental abuse.
However, I would say that all ex-Witnesses bristle at being told what to think and that is the biggest problem that Cedars is falling into now. He has a narrow view of what has occured and seems unwilling to budge from it. Whether accurate or not, it seems Cedars was more concerned that people accept his view rather than turn around and take a look at it from someone else's shoes.
In order to gain public acceptance, an organization like AAWA needs to have empathy and humility. With Cedars as the spokesperson, I don't feel those qualities are being demonstrated. I think there are a great many people that would love to support what AAWA stands for, but they want to feel that they are being heard. Even if the answer is no, many people will accept it if they feel it was at least considered.
The issues at hand do not feel like they were considered, they appear to be dismissed and I think that is generating a lot of ill will. Based on the dialog growing on both sides, it appears the message has switched off the Watchtower and it is more Anti-JWN and Anti-Cedars. It can change, but to do so required desire for change.
-
Marvin Shilmer
-
“I think there is a trigger, something that happens (usually personal experience or experience of someone they care about) that makes people start doubting and that is when they start looking for answers.”
Simon,
I don’t disagree there are plenty of instances just as you describe. But there are also many intelligent folks in the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Intelligent people are natural born learners. They love to learn. They learn from everything they’re exposed to. Exposure to good logical information is helpful to these people not because some trigger but, rather, because of what they are. They are intelligent. Because exposure to good logical information is helpful then preparing and distributing such information is helpful to the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses because it influences the smartest who have not lost their moral compass. Influence these and you’ve done something.
Marvin Shilmer
-
Marvin Shilmer
-
“I think you're laying way too much blame on the "JWN peanut gallery". Let's be honest: the AAWA fucked up monumentally.”
Simon,
Of AAWA I speak to AAWA. Of JWN I speak to JWN.
I’ve seen no monumental “f… up” as you say.
There is no association start up that runs perfectly smooth. There are always lessons learned when an association of people is brand new out of the box. Poor name choices. Poor mission statements. Poor administration. Poor charters. Poor bylaws. Poor board policies. Poor operating policies. Poor board compositions. Poor financial management. I’ve seen them all, and sometimes all at the same time in the same co-op. I’ve seen collaborations begin with far, far more mistakes than AAWA and go on to have brilliant success.
From what I can tell of JWN’s peanut gallery, hardly any have had much if any experience with association building. They treat mistakes like the sky is falling.
The sky has not fallen. The peanut gallery has only succeeded in convincing itself.
The success or failure of AAWA will be determined by robustness of structure together, passion, resources and talent.
“There are still lots of things unanswered…”
My suggestion is that you ask the good people of AAWA if you can help them. You’ll get lots of answers and most assuredly your expertise would be welcomed.
A cooperative association of people is made by the people who work it. The better the talent and passion the better the association. If you consider yourself a good asset then help AAWA be better by helping directly. It cost no more than a little time to help.
I do consider you a good asset.
Marvin Shilmer
-
ThomasCovenant
The website that had the most influence on my exit was the old "quotes" site.
No comments, just quotes. No experiences.
Freeminds and people's experiences did nothing for me. Still doesn't to a large degree. It's either the 'truth' or it isn't.
Now 'Jwfacts' is the go to site for me .
Everyone is different
-
Marvin Shilmer
-
“I also think the AAWA has let down its own board and seem to have hung Cedars out to dry.”
Simon,
If you were working with AAWA to help and accordingly had firsthand knowledge of what you speak of, you’d know that notion could not be more false.
Unlike so many others here, I’ve gone out of my way to make direct contact with founders of this association. I’ve done this for a variety of reasons, but one reason is to avoid making bad assessments based on secondhand information and speculative gossip. What you write above can only have come from the latter because with firsthand knowledge I know better.
Marvin Shilmer
-
Marvin Shilmer
-
“Anyone who thinks that's an accurate and fair description of what happened here over the past couple of weeks lacks sound judgement in my view.”
slimboyfat,
I have drawn my conclusions with firsthand knowledge of happenings here and from the likes of Richard Kelly, Barbara Anderson and John Cedars. I’ve reached out to make sure to have firsthand answers to questions. Have you troubled yourself to do the same?
If so, then please do. You might just find out there is much more than meets the eye, and the JWN “eye” in particular.
John Cedars is a man just like you and me. He wants to do good. He’s talented. He is a good man. Can he be an ass sometimes? Yes, but probably not as much as I can be. And so what? Name me one man who does not have his moments.
Simon is someone I have tremendous respect for. You ask Simon if he’s had his moments over the lifetime of JWN. He has. So have I. So have you. So has everyone worth a spit.
Marvin Shilmer