The Outing of Faders, and the Epilogue of Sic Semper Tyrannis

by zed is dead 298 Replies latest members private

• 

  zed is dead

  Marvin's story in real life is this, which he didn't answer to earlier:

  Marvin's been in bed with the AAWA since the beginning. Dick Kelley was most definitely the third party Marvin was speaking of when he said he didn't contact Cedars directly. So we have the two remaining incorporating officers in contact with him. I was wondering why he was so into debunking the pseudonym controversy. As it turns out he was merely parroting Dick, who as the incorporator and legal/accounting officer would stand the most to lose should it ever go to court. Since Dick's a huge fan of Marvin's 'work' and gave him a special shout-out in his AAWA introductory post, Marvin felt he had to repay the favour. Marvin also stands to gain should the AAWA start distributing his material. Don't buy the 'interested third party who's trying to settle the dispute' nonsense that Marvin keeps spewing.

  zed
• 

  zed is dead

  Just a thought, Marvin only comes on this thread when Cedars withdraws from it. I don't think it is coincidence; it is more a "tag team" effort on their part to try to look good, instead of be good.

  zed
• 

  *lost*

  Zed - I have to give you moral support on this situation, as it involves a person life. How commendable to see you standing up for the afflicted.

  A life has been destroyed, SIMPLE, it is wrong, it is despicable, no one should ever ever have a hand in impacting on others lives in such a serious fashion.

  There may be many people on here who are trying to divert this into a 'personal' agenda.

  It is not personal, it is facts. It is justice, it is honesty, it is all those things that we expect and demand from eachother in life, rightly so. There are enough charlatans and sociopaths in this world to keep it spinning for a very long time.

  Considering we are part of a community who regularly and lustily bay for blood from any other organisation or peoples who commit heinous crimes to others, in whatever fashion, I think it is only right that that the truth should be told, is that not what we are all fighting for in our lives, fighting against the WT for, the truth ??

  Let us not hastily sweep things under the carpet in life, we may turn into another version of the cult we left.

  There is not much left that I have not seen about people left to shock me in this world, i don't just accept something said, because it was said, or by who, I deal with and accept facts, if the shit flies up to smack someone in the face as a result, tough, it's what you call payback.

  AAWA and it's 'board of officers', sorry, AAWA was an abortion from the get go, so let the 'officers' take the heat fot the muck ups and failures and wrong doing's, because it is all their faults, collectively, all of those who were involved in setting it up, (AS A BUSINESS, DEALING IN AND HANDLING AND MAKING MONEY!!) and running it, in their scramble, so it would now seeM, their scramble in their race for glory and money and maybe fame and public recognition, any business or organistaion whose first pursuit is money, business, sums it all up for me.

  Stinks of an old boys club, until it is resolved, it will stink forever, and forever the 'officers' shalll have to carry the shame, for the damage they have caused to people's lives. And rightly so, is that not the same attitude the officers have to the WT etc.

  Lets not forget, these 'officers' were 'supposed' to be, very capable and experienced in this kind of work, they were supposed to actually know what they were doing, heck, they even had a high profile businessman on their team, no man builds a house without first planning and calculating costs, heck, wouldn't help much if ya couldn't put the roof on cos you miscalculated. So yeah, the buck stops with the 'officers' who were in charge and have proved, they have words, but no clue.

  Reality bites AAWA. Deal with it.

  Welcome to the real world. You don't get second chances when you f up people's lives. Unless you can do serious damage limitation and control and put things right, retribution.
• 

  besty

  @marvin

  a reminder of the facts, as you presented them on 22nd April - on this thread page 2 - at least 4 days after this trainwreck was first noticed

  Today I spoke with leadership inside AAWA to get direct answers to direct questions. Here is what I’m told

  1. Two persons arguably under auspices of AAWA created Facebook accounts. As I understand it Facebook has a selection of “secret” for accounts, and this was the sort of account each of these persons selected. There was an apparent oversight having to do with restriction to administrators and that problem was promptly resolved. I’m told a total of 50 people were invited to these accounts, all of which were vetted and none of whose private information was made public.

  2. One person created a public AAWA Facebook account and invited tons of people, and tons took up that invitation and there private data was collected and displayed. This person made use of AAWA’s name and logo. An AAWA volunteer saw this and immediately contacted the individual to have them cease and desist. But damage had already occurred. It should be noted that this person never sent in a volunteer request form, was never asked by AAWA to do anything, acted contrary to AAWA’s mission with his actions and, essentially, thumbed his nose until he was compelled to stop what he was doing by alternate method. (Which method is no business of mine to repeat!) This guy was not and is not associated with AAWA in any way or for any purpose, other than perhaps in his own mind.

  You spoke directly AAWA leadership, at some length it would appear. They told you (point 1) that they had made 'an apparent oversight' and 50 vetted people were 'invited' to some admin restricted account. Anyways - promptly resolved and case closed.

  AAWA leadership described to you (point 2) another different situation where an unauthorised individual used their logo and made an unofficial Facebook page and 'invited' many people, who 'took up' that invitation. He was told to cease and desist, and was eventually made to stop by unrepeatable methods :-)

  I don't see the bit where AAWA admitted their own leadership force-added hundreds of unwitting victims to their official page. Can you see that bit?

  But wait, there's more. On the same page you further state:

  I did inquire about who is Julia. I found out this person was one of the two who responsibly set up Facebook accounts. She's not part of AAWA's Board, but she is a volunteer and was doing work for AAWA when setting up that particular Facebook account.

  So you know that Julia was acting on behalf of AAWA and in direct communication with their leadership and acted 'responsibly' on Facebook. I don't see the bit where AAWA admitted their own volunteers force-added hundreds of unwitting victims to their official page. Can you see that bit?

  Page 4 Marvin says:

  For starters it means no personal or private information is made public without express consent. Otherwise my impression is that sufficient private communication occurred to convince the AAWA associate that membership was appropriate for AAWAs mission.

  Still nothing about force-adding by AAWA. (by the way 'force' means without consent and 'adding' means what it says, not 'inviting' which implies affirmative action on the part of the invitee - but I'm sure you now know the difference.)

  Page 5 Marvin says:

  Because AAWA understands the need for privacy, as I understand it part of the vetting communication is to fully disclose what information is shared with those accepted into the group. Hence anyone who signs up has ample opportunity to decide if that’s what they want or not.

  Still nothing about force-adding by AAWA. This all about AAWA respecting privacy, vetting volunteers who 'sign up'. The following day 23rd April and by now Page 6 Marvin asks:

  How did Julia force add you? Please explain

  So 4 pages into a thread where you are defending AAWA you now for the first time ask about force-adding, implying you have no idea what this even is.

  Page 7 - clarifying if it is rogue AAWA, official AAWA or a newly created third option - nothing to do with AAWA :

  Was this to the rogue AAWA Facebook account, or to either of the two 'authorized' Facebook accounts, or to something else? Do you have any idea how this thing happened? I mean, other than assuming the worst of AAWA

  Page 8: the rogue account is till in the frame:

  Force added to what , precisely . From what I gather there was one Facebook account that is the culprit, and that account was set up by someone with no ties to AAWA yet audaciously used its name and logo.

  Page 8 - you don't know how force-adding works:

  I don’t think it’s that simple. I can’t hit a button and add you to anything

  Page 10:

  As presented to me, AAWA volunteers most certainly added folks to two Facebook accounts. But I’m told that none were added so that personal information was shared publicly

  Page 11:

  My impression is that being added was not the issue but, rather, that being added without permission and particularly added for public viewing was the issue. I’m told that AAWA did not make private information open for public viewing.

  I like the distinction you make between 'being added' and 'being added without permission' - at least you have dropped 'invited' from the lexicon.

  I think volunteers inside AAWA are trying to “fix it”. I asked and was told that was the case.

  That's good news. And now word is finally filtering through....

  My take is that folks believe there was insufficient security measures and in some cases inappropriate/presumptive adding of their Facebook presence to things AAWA. Beyond that my take is there is suspicion of dishonesty from inside AAWA

  Page 13:

  I’m told there is no reason to disbelieve fizzywidget’s account of her/his, Dagney and Rebel8’s experience. To be sure, this is an admission regarding the “force add” thing and also what was apparently some behaviorally unexpected response from an AAWA volunteer.

  Do you see why it looks very much like 10 pages of circular questions to get you to understand force-adding?

  You then, on that thread, took another 10 pages or so to finally admit that AAWA still would not confirm to you their people force-added 800+ people.

  Tedious.
• 

  zed is dead

  besty,

  Thank you for holding your nostrils, and wading back through some of Marvin's previous crap shoveling.

  zed
• 

  slimboyfat

  Well done for wading through all that crap besty. I concluded Marvin was talking nonsense on purpose a long time ago so don't even bother any more. With lack of reasoning skills and ability to miss the point like that Marvin really would be better suited to being a Watchtower apologist. In fact he came pretty close with his latest 'the elders are highly trained and don't make poor judgements' spiel on this thread.
• 

  besty

  Well done for wading through all that crap besty.

  I could have cross-referenced other threads, but I only had 30 minutes to sit out in the sun this morning.

  And belive me Marvin has carried on in exactly the same manner on numerous other threads relating to the AAWA. His talents lie best in writing about the history of the Watchtower where facts can be verified against higher standards. Social interaction on message boards is not his thing. Avoid.
• 

  UnConfused

  I believe that to be the most dishonest defense I've ever heard. A man who's blogging and full well knows how poorly trained and idiotic some elders are uses the "highly trained card" to deflect the claims of SST. The only way you could do this is if you desperately want this to not be true.
• 

  jeremiah18:5-10

  Lost,

  You said with reference to aawa that you don't get a second chance when you muck up people's lives. I beg to differ. How many, myself included, engaged in this conversation, were once elders that regularly mucked up people's lives by dfing them? Now they have seen the light, left wt, and are welcomed here, in most cases with open arms. Our past acts are excused because we couldn't see past the cult we were in and the agendas we were pushing. Is it not very similar to the goings on of this aawa debacle. I mean this as an honest, humble question, not to argue or debate. I just see it as being quite similar, being blinded by the organization you are backing, heavily engaged in, and their agendas. Wouldnt we welcome someone seeing the error of their ways and leaving that behind, even if leaving was forced upon them ?
• 

  zed is dead

  jeremiah,

  Let's expand on your analogy a little further.

  Some of my best friends are former elders. In my experience, there were different types of elders in the congregation, with different reasons for what they did. There were loving, but misguided brothers that really wanted to do what is right. There were also people that did it for status, and could care less about their flock's welfare.

  From what you have shared, I figure you were the first type.

  Refering to the second type: If you take a egotistical, unethical JW out of the religion, what do you have left? Someone with an ego and no ethics.

  I am sure that you would be personally crushed if you made a mistake that destroyed someone's life. I wish some others were as sensitive as you are.

  zed