Screen Name vs Character

by Amazing 57 Replies latest jw friends

  • Lindy

    Good comment, but I was thinking along the lines that he should have his "plumbing" flushed out and maybe redone with some modern piping. Seems he has a bit of antiquated stuff that is stuffed up with what goes through plumbing.


  • SEAKEN2001

    I hear ya. I use the same term when expressing the incredulous. I don't know what all the hubbub has been about but for my part you don't need to explain.

    You have flaws? Amazing! <g>


  • Amazing


    And didnt you have Amazing(Anointed) in parentheses? As in special 'class'?

    Ahhhh, yes, the "Anointed" thang. Some might recall also that I told H20 I was trying to use "Great High Priet" But someone already took it. So, on the spur of the moment, I chose "Anointed" as a mockery of the whole religion.

  • Amazing


    I thought you left. If you are gonna stck around I hope you will start talking about issues and ideas rather than just talking about yourself. It will make for much more interesting reading.

    I agree with you in general. However, I did not start attacking my character. If people didn't want to talk about me, they wouldn't, and I would have no need to make corrections where warranted.

    However, the above is not really as much about me, as it goes to my post (issue) of how extremism can lead to all-or-nothing thinking, character assasinations, etc. That is the issue of my post.

    Anyway, when I get to completing my response regarding Amnesian's material, and a few others posts, I will close the book and move on ... There are much more interesting things to discuss.

  • Joseph Joachim
    Joseph Joachim

    When I joined H20, I initially used the term "Simply Amazing" because it captured my reactions to many things I have been learning as a result of leaving the JW religion. Some here may recall my initial use of the full term.

    Actually, I remember more than that. I remember that your screen name was "Annointed", and "Simply Amazing" was your signature. You introduced yourself as someone who claimed to be of the annointed while a JW; that was a red flag for me at the time (and surely for some others). The Society says that young people who claim to be of the annointed either have psycollogical issues or are looking for prominence (or both); I agree with the Society on this one.

    His Holliness has to be very careful in this board, because some of us has better memory than Him.

    Joseph Joachim, an overly-enthusiastic pundit of borderline reality

  • Joseph Joachim
    Joseph Joachim

    While I was posting you replied to Tina. Glad to see your memory is back.


  • Valentine

    Yep JJ that's how i remember it too.It wasn't mockery,he was dead serious that he was of the anointed. Some old h20'ers will clarify this.And he has the smeggin gall to call me a liar lololo.

    Ahhh screen name=character=liar.Love the irony here.

  • Francois

    I've always wondered how this site became so centered on discussions about the people who post here, instead of about support and help for the walking wounded who have gotten away from the JWs. I guess we're just programmed to find fault with other after years of training.

    To be sure, there are some people here who are outwardly unlovely, but I wonder if this is a result of my above speculation? After all, if you beat an unintelligent dog, and keep his spirit, his body, and his mind chained he will become evil, wicked, mean, bad, and nasty.

    I've talked about people here too. I'm not claiming to be as pure as the driven snow. I fell into lockstep with everyone else. I wonder if we could reform ourselves on this site? Or even if we want to.


  • Kent

    Hi Amazing;

    If I can give you a friendly advice, don't bother these kinds of discussion. If I, or many of my online friends, should engage in stuff like this, we wouldn't have time for anything else.

    People disagree, people misunderstand, sometimes we don't express ourselves the smartest way - or we may push peoples buttons without even meaning to do so.

    It really doesn't matter. Personal "wars" will always be here, and they will always be "stupid". "Stupid" in the sense there are no winners - since every side will claim a victory. In reality, the only winners is the Witchpower Libel & Crackpot Society, since they are the ones with a mighty good reason for laughing. They can point to these fruitless and never ending threads - saying: "There you see what happens when..."

    It's not my business, and I don't want to have my two cents in the discussion in question. It's just a general opinion on these kinds of events.

    Yachyd Da


    I need the new KM's as they come! Please send me scans!

    Daily News On The Watchtower and the Jehovah's Witnesses:

  • teejay


    What an odd post! (Welcome "back," btw ) I think you want to accomplish "something" and if you stick around to this thread's conclusion, I am going to find out what that "something" is. So will everyone else who follows it, despite the fact that clues lay all around *already*.

    First, something should be said that might at first seem unimportant but is crucial to this discussion, based as it is on the quote of mine that it is.

    I like waiting. I won't go into all the reasons but one thing especially is that she speaks the truth... plain and simple, straight/no chaser. So, when she said some things about an old nemesis of mine (and Julie *is* a nemesis of mine... ask anybody) it struck me as odd. The object of someone's comments, be they nemesis or lifelong blood brother makes no difference to me. I like truth, pure and simple. Seeing untruths tends to get under my skin. It's a long story for another day.

    I went back and carefully read and reread... looked to see if that odd feeling I had about waiting's post had any foundation. Normally Julie is as fastidious about punctuation as I am, but this time she wasn't. So, I cut and pasted Julie's post to a word document, separating all the sentences with paragraph breaks and examined them, comparing them to what waiting said.

    Know what I found? I found that waiting's analysis of Julie's 'last' post bore no resemblance to reality. No big deal... I like waiting, but that don't mean she's perfect. I know she ain't perfect. She's admitted as much.

    Anyway, to make it clear to me (and whoever else) and doing my little bit to keep the discussion on a level above the oft heard "personal attack" level, I posted my conclusions, what my perceptions were of what Julie *actually* said as compared to what waiting SAID she said. I stated no personal opinion either in agreement or otherwise of Julie's comments. You cut one of those comments to make a point, the nature of which point I will soon find out... for sure.

    Since my character is part of the issues that have been addressed by several posters...

    The ONLY aspect of your character that some have called into question, and that pretty much without challenge even from your 'supporters,' is that you withdrew from the discussion after it just got started. You really MUST stop playing that pathetic 'woe is me' violin, Amazing. Don't you know that it got old two weeks ago?

    Teejay said: Conclusion: No more insulting than you when you mentioned that one has to wonder about someone who'd pick the screen name "Amazing."
    I am not sure if Teejay shares agreement with what he quoted, but for discussion sake, I will treat it as though he does. Correct me if I am wrong about your view Teejay.

    Your 'treatment' of a quote does not make it so. You are "not sure" because I have never said. EVER. As I have already said, I am not here stating *my* view. For the sake of clarity, I AM quoting a point of wonder on waiting's part. I have never stated my view in this or any other thread of what I thought of your choice of screen names, not even as a point of wonder.

    Outnfree said...
    I did not read outnfree's original post referencing her opinion of you primarily because what she says (either good or bad) is irrelevant when compared to what I didn't say. Why? Because there is one seemingly trivial aspect of *her* relationship with you that establishes an unmistakable difference from *my* relationship with you if you'd care to give it ANY consideration. May I tell you what that is? Outnfree has met you. I have not. All I have to go on are your posts here on this db.

    Even so, I have not said anything... not one word... about your character. I don't know you. I'd be a damn fool to comment on the character of someone I've never met. Those are in abundance here, but I'm not one of them. I don't know what kind of elder you were, what kind of father you are, how you treat people in the real world today. The only thing I've said about you personally is: you (seemingly) ran away from a tough argument. Period.

    Btw, as my friend Seeker pointed out, some people... I say SOME people... have two separate personas: a real-life persona and an online one. As far as I'm concerned, you may have both and nothing you say here will change that opinion. Based on outnfree's perception, if you quoted her honestly, I'd say that you DO have two personas... based only on what I have seen here, of course. My point is, while outnfree saw you the way she saw you, you might very well come across entirely differently here, giving a false impression of the real "you." I never discount that possibility. People are more than words on a computer screen—a truth often forgotten.

    I have noted all the way through Teejay's comments about me that every aspect of my character is now suspect, from distrust of al my prior posts to even the selection of my screen name as evidence of some self-serving vanity.

    "All the way through", huh? Tell me: did I make comments or did I merely attempt to interpret others' comments? Can you not comprehend what you read, Sir? Or is it that you read quite well but hope to disingenuously cast doubt in the minds of others on someone who's innocent of your allegation? Let's find out:

    You speak of "teejay's comments about me." Since you've already noted them, would you be good enough to list the specific comments *I* made about you that casts doubt on, quote: "every aspect of your character"? Do so line by line, if you would, including *my* thoughts as to the vanity I... as in *I*... feel you show in the selection of your name. Thank you. Your doing this will go a long way in helping re-establish you, at least in MY mind, as a fair man.

    Thanks Teejay and Outnfree for presenting two ways of how people see the same thing.

    Right. Whatever.

    And thank *YOU* for your recap of all your screen names. I was not a regular poster on the old h2o but knew of the site long before it closed/moved. I followed the evolution of your screen name, including "Simply Amazing," "Simply Amazing (Anointed)," "SA," and the just plain ol' "Amazing" that you've settled with here. I may have missed some and if I did... apologies. Rereading the recap of the genesis and history of your screen name was riveting.

    Now, about me. On h2o I signed up as "Devin" (because I always thought I'd give a son that name) but I always signed my posts "todd" because... well... lacking imagination, I picked my real-life name. The only other screen name I've ever used on any db is "teejay" because... well... those are my initials if one spells them out. You know? "tj"?

    Question: Based on what YOU know or can tangibly demonstrate, when did either "Devin" or "teejay" ever... I say EVER... make *any* comment about what was on your mind or what you meant by your screen name? Would you be so kind as to answer that question for me?


Share this