by OnTheWayOut 113 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
One more thought:
On the previous thread that was pulled, it appears that a single fader helped a DF person to get reinstated.
Let's not forget that it appears as if fake reinstatement is a successful possibility. It may be ill advised, difficult to do, have low chance of success, have problematic aftermath etc etc - BUT - it does appear to have worked.
I'll hold your jackets while you have a square go guys.....(and rifle said jackets for money)
This could be a great Franchise opportunity !!!
You get a territory (perhaps part of a State) that you agree to manage. The person desiring to "move" would contact the Franchise owner in that area. Arrangements could be made to transfer the publisher records, etc.
I can see many value added services that could be offered.
If the elders wanted to discuss some issue with the "new" congregation elders, 2 or 3 of the Franchise owners could simply do a conference call. If needed, 3 could create a "committee." They could also periodically report back to the old congregation on the progress that the person has made since moving.
Perhaps as part of the arrangement, the "publisher" could then email his Field Service report to the Franchise owner each month. If anyone from the old congregation questioned his/her progess, he could retrive the data easily.
The regional manager for the compay could plan to meet with each Franchise owner every year or so ... perhaps he could even be called the CO or DO.
An annual training program for the Owners could be instituted, perhaps an annual "Assembly."
Income would simply be based on the services provided from the basic, one-time "Switching Congregations" to more complete package plans. Something like an annual maintenance contract could be offeredd whereby the the old congregation is given periodic updates on the status of the person.
Wow, the more I think of it, I see a lot of opportunities here.
Rub a Dub
OTWO- Good thread . You stated , " As a chairman of a JC working with other congregations I always just trusted I was speaking with actual elders from actual congregations and I didn't try to call Bethel to see if these guys were legit. I trusted the brothers , trust in the brothers is important. " Amen, come Lord Jesus. In my brief career as an " elder " I found this to be true as well.
ALL TIME JEFF hit a good point when he said men with knowledge and years of experience should be the ones to get a fictitious set up going. There are enough experienced ex-witness elders here to pull that off , but the big question is " Does the WT society still hold you in fear ? " Only each person can ask himself or herself that
Besty writes: "I support the concept of almost any idea that may help people exit the WTS being developed. No contradiction here - sorry Vinny."
**** Too bad you instead wrote, " "I would say it's a good idea to take the concept (((of FakeReinstate 1.0)))) and work with the more knowledgeable posters on this board ((((to come up with a refined enhanced version-FakeReinstate 2.0.)))) "
Accepting "the concept", of, "almost any idea", is quite different from, "accepting the concept of Fake reinstatement 101 and seek to improve that same Fake Reinstatement to 2.0". They are two different points of view as written. You just now changed up your opinion. You supported the concept of Fake reinstatement initially. It's in print Besty. Here, I'll just quote your own words again:
"I would say it's a good idea to take the concept of FakeReinstate 1.0 and work with the more knowledgeable posters on this board to come up with a refined enhanced version - FakeReinstate 2.0."
Besty writes: " I'm not sensitive or offended by you Vinny - mind-reading is a great skill to master though - keep working on it.
But then the very next sentence writes: "I note you have offered no apology or retraction for accusing me of being drunk or of being insane, and now of being hypocritical as well - that is one sophisticated set of ad hominem argumentation techniques you deploy - wow - we should all watch out for your white hot debating skills."
**** It looks to me like you are speaking trough both sides of your mouth in one paragraph Besty.
And all the while YOU are the one that started with the smart a$$, sarcastic one liners. Go Read again! What a hoot. Where was my apology Besty? Of course I never asked for one or care for one. This is a public forum and we are both old enough to mix it up without getting all worked up and hurt feelings.
You wanted to dish it out, but could not take it, and only NOW wanting an apology. Amazing stuff here.
Okay then Besty, here she goes: I am sorry I replied to your sarcastic, smart-alec one liners the same way you did to me. I did not realize you wanted only to dish it out and could not take the heat in return. I apologize that you saw fit to accuse me of doing what you had initiated to begin with. And I am truly sorry that you cannot see how you are being a real hypocrite on this thread because of doing to me all the things I just apologized to you for.
How's that Besty?
Bestsy writes: "I don't recall disagreeing with your specific points - what I did disagree with was your wholly negative approach to the entire idea."
**** I disagreed with the idea itself and explained exactly why I disagreed with numerous details listed. That's not a "negative approach" to the idea, that's called disagreeing with the idea after looking at it closely and explaining why.
And ironically you agree with me now as well. This only gets better...
Bestsy writes: "You even said that fading after being DF'd would pose no more difficulty than a fake reinstatement. Sorry mate - thats just plain impossible to fade after you get DF'd. Why you even suggested fading as a solution to beat the system on a thread about DF'd ones is difficult to grasp."
**** Then allow me to help you to "grasp it". I thought you'd easily understand on your own.
When one is DF'd and shunned (as you and many others are right now); we have two ideas on the table how to get reinstated so that you can have relationships with family and loved ones.
Option A- Fake reinstatement letter that won't work in almost every scenario and which you also disagree with yourself now. Bad idea.
Option B- You go back to the meetings solely for the purpose of getting reinstated and then getting those relationships back. (I'm sorry if you still cannot grasp yet, sounds pretty simple to me).
People do this ALL THE TIME. There are so many stories of people that get reinstated for the only reason of getting family and loved ones back and nothing more.
Now, you still cannot talk about too many JW things, but once you are reinstated, you do not ever have to go to another meeting again. You just need to be discreet about it all from there on out.
But neither could you talk about anything critical of JW's, or birthdays, the JWN, apostafets etc etc if you somehow pulled off a fake reinstatement.
IN BOTH CASES you would be dead in the water if you brought up any of these anti JW things.
And this is what I explained last night and which you avoided completely in your reply.
So, which of the two is easier, and more possible to last and to get back your family?
You just have to put on a front to get back in. Occasionally a year or so, usually six mos from my experience, and even less at times depending on reasons you were DF'd.
If you don't want to do that then you are out of luck. Just live with your new life and hope they somehow come around. It's an unfair system but it does work since most JW's are still in the dark.
Which is why I try to help people online. Just like I saw the light online three years ago.
Besty writes: "Anyways - time to sit outside in the sun - I'm an unemployed waster but even I have my attention span limits."
**** Agreed on attention span. Far too much time here. You can even have the last word... (unless of course you get too out of line)...
Over and OUT!
Vinny
Damn it, thats it!
Vinny, cut it out. Stop making mountains out of molehills. You seem to be way too sensitive to perceived contradictions. I side with Besty, even though I think the whole sham congregation thing is a bad idea.
OTWO stated explicity that this was hypothetical. Evidentally, he also meant (I am sure) that we should not take ourselves too seriously?
Let it go dude.
Once again Jeff you make generalizations without content about the exact issues we have been discussing here. I believe you apologized the last time you did just that.
I simply replied to Besty's posts word for word. Where is the harm in doing that? At least I offered specific details to what he wrote.
Betsy started the sarcsm and smart a$$ remarks. I only replied to them.
He claims he cannot understand some things about fading after being DF'd. So I clarified for him.
He wanted an apology so I gave him a good one.
My very last post I said I am out of this. But you jump in with barrels blasting like Yosemite Sam.
If you are a moderator then say so. Otherwise why not just let us work this out or at least make some kind of specific contribution to the issues?
Rather than taking sides with one person from the one side of your mouth while agreeing with my exact position from the other side.
If Besty or Flipper or whoever else wants to get all sarcastic and smarta$$ (((FIRST))), then I have no problems dealing directly with them and their issues myself.
I would hope you can see this.
One more time now... over ... and ... OUT!
Vinny
NOT A MODERATOR, WOULDN'T TAKE THE JOB IF THEY PAYED ME!!
but....
Not this time Vinny, I apologized for different reasons before. And for the record, I have no idea why you sabotaged Flippers thread, but you made your point about 8000 times then, and have tried the same approach on this thread. This thread was different. I am just saying that in my view, you are 100% wrong in this case. You come across to me as taking yourself way too seriously.
Why pick on ex JW's for doing what they will? OTWO said this was a hypothetical. That should have been your first hint. But to be frank, you sit there and pick on one person at a time, dissecting their every word looking for perceived contradictions instead of trying to "get" the "spirit" of what they wrote.
It's as if you're only here to argue? Who cares if Besty tried to be a fake SEC? I said I thought it a bad idea. As I am one more semi anonymous poster in ex JW land (something you, me, Besty and Flipper have in common) why belabor your disagreement at nauseam? Besty looks over 21. Hell, he smokes a cigar.
Trust me, I am an expert in taking myself too seriously. I know the smell..... You come across as taking yourself too seriously.
I could see that Besty wasn't at all camping out on the position you implied. I have no idea what the heck you were try to accomplish, what point you were trying to make. But this thread had some value, albeit limited. And yes, if you think that making up fake Sec and Congs is a bad idea, we are in agreement.
I am not trying to fight Besty's battles, but he wasn't arguing for it. He was arguing that perhaps it could be an option with the right people and circumstances. (to say it one more time, I wouldn't do it)
And trust me, with all respect, I wasn't blasting with both barrels. It isn't my place, and this isn't the place.
You don't have to like my opinion or me. But just like you felt comfortable to express your self, same here. I am not looking to make enemies, I am just calling them as I see them. Cest la vie.
thanks ATJ, winstonchurchill, asilentone etc - also for the apology Vinny - accepted, and no harm done. I will try and be less hasty with the one liners - thanks for pointing that out.
like I've been saying all the way through - there is no one right answer for all scenarios, and flipper seems to have successfully pulled off a fairly improbable one, which this thread and maybe others past and future have given a second look at
I don;t think it is too much to ask to give stuff a second look - particularly on a discussion forum such as this which has no time constraint
Jeff, my initial replies are found on page one. They were reasonable in content and tone, IMO. You can tell me if you disagree. In fact my first one I just quoted Snakesinthetower's excellent post from the now deleted thread.
As I helped Besty see last evening, this thing took a downward turn last night when he misunderstood my laughing with him, at his natural selection comment, to thinking I was crying/boohooing at him. (And I think Besty could have at least acknowledged that misreading to soften our exchanges some).
It was then that BETSY (not me) came across sarcastic, as a smart a$$ and in his own words hasty. From that point on I addressed his every reply in detail. Nothing more nothing less. I do that with JW's as well. And nobody seems to mind then. Well maybe not Reniaa and Spike so much.
Anyway, I tried many times to end this last night and today. He continued. I just wouldn't let him get away with points that I felt were either untrue or continuous shots at me without the good favor of a reply.
My replies are also full of content here, not just playing around picking on Betsy. Arguments themselves do have value. If you read my comments I always post content along with some of the fluff.
I've always enjoyed both of your and Betsy's posts here (and still do) and I've seen the same from you guys where you have valued mine.
It was a simple misunderstanding here that lead to a good ole brouhaha and what some have called entertainment along with a discussion of specific issues.
No harm done. If I were to pick on somebody else, initially, I can expect some replies in return. Nothing different with me here. Besty did start this thing going downhill. I just hopped on for a fun ride. Maybe I could have just let it go. But there was was too much going on at the time, I guess.
When JW's say things that you Jeff think are worth getting back to them on you do just that. Ask our resident JW Reniaa. Same with most people that I know of here. It's what makes us decent human beings. We care enough to offer a reply. I don't view that as any kind of negative quality, rather in fact the opposite.
Now, I'd like to nominate Alltime Jeff as a JWN moderator. (even if a slanted/biased one at times)
Any takers?
You get paid in satisfaction and many fun times here and better than the movies.
Vinny
PS- For Besty: (no this is not saying you are drunk, this is to having a couple of cold ones after a fun ride).
