Problems with the "Bogus AWAA Fan Page"..
by OUTLAW 447 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
Dismissing servant
"Well, Cedars already said he was done with this thread. He thinks everything is just peachy now, is taking his ball and going home."
EP: Do you really think he's got the balls??
-
slimboyfat
Has she got any position within AAWA? Does she post here?
-
wannaexit
Read this whole thread--feel a little vomit coming up in my mouth.
-
Dismissing servant
As far as I know she's got no position in the AAWA.
-
DT
I think the AAWA Facebook group is doing more harm than good. I don't think there is any justification for a group with that name where people can be added aginst their will. There are too many risks, even if it is "secret". I partially blame Facebook, but they probably aren't going to change.
I know Facebook might be part of the AAWA strategy, but I think they would be better off cutting their losses. They are losing too much credibility. They need to do something quickly if they are still going to have a hope of being effective.
I thought the debate over the name was kind of silly, but this is far more serious. Damage has been done and the potential for more harm is still present. If they can set up a new group that insures that only those who request to be added are added, then great. If not, they would probably be better off without it.
-
fizzywiglet
Don't know if she posts here. But yes, she is the coordinator/representative I referred to earlier. She approached me on Cedars' behalf and told me she was working on a sooper-seekrit nonprofit that they wanted me to make a YouTube testimonial endorsing, but she couldn't give me any details about what I would be allegedly endorsing because it was soooo sooper-seekrit other than the usual vague/overexuberant "yeah, it's totally a big deal and totally gonna take down the Watchtower" (so, um, no details? No thanks). So she's been on board since the planning stages. She is the volunteer/representative Juan Viejo referred to. She is also the one who was defensive when Dagney and others confronted her about being added with consent. She is the one who said "What, are we supposed to PM 1,000 people and invite them? That's too much work!"
(And uh, yes. PM-ing 1,000 people and inviting them is exactly what she should have done. But no. She participated in and sanctioned, for the entire board's benefit, the force-add approach.)
And despite what others have said, it isn't only friends you can add to groups. It's friends of friends (mutual friends), too. And, Cedars/Juan Viejo claimed that AAWA group members who also had other group pages could and did force-add their own group members, too.
Just because I join, say, a group about dogs, doesn't mean I'd be OK with the administrator of a group about dogs then adding me to a different group that I didn't choose to join...What if it's a group I consider more militant? Or a group I don't agree with?
And I definitely wouldn't be OK with the second group refusing to address the situation and then just saying, "Well, it's OK. You can leave if you want to, but we're also going to just keep all of these force-added members who didn't realize they were force-added, who did not choose to be here, and not worry about their privacy...hopefully they'll never even realize that they were force-added, and we can keep them to pad our group count."
And again, let's not forget to stress...Juan has already admitted that there were suspected moles and apologists force-added to that group. They are still there. They have access to everybody's name. If someone chooses to join that group, then fine. They have taken the risk upon themselves. But Cedars thinks he can just make the decision for those 1,000 people and take the risk on their behalf. That. Is. Not. Right.
Edited to add, since I am again out of posts, in response to Dagney below:
Yeah, Dagney, I had remembered you telling me about the confrontation and I weren't sure whether you had participated. Earlier on the thread I said I thought you had also posted, but I wasn't sure and I knew you would correct me if I was wrong. So thanks! But yeah, point is, you did witness the confrontation and Julia's response before leaving the group.
-
Dismissing servant
That's true, but the AAWA people doesn't realize it!
-
HintOfLime
Has she got any position within AAWA? Does she post here?
From what I understand, they are a volunteer.
Seems unnessassary to try to link them to an account here. For those that wish to cut ties on Facebook, they have all the information they need to do so.
- Lime
-
Dagney
She is also the one who was defensive when Dagney and others confronted her about being added with consent. She is the one who said "What, are we supposed to PM 1,000 people and invite them? That's too much work!"
fizzy, I did not post on their site. What happened was there was a newsfeed where Bo posted. I thought, "oh, that must be the new group." I followed the link and of course was on the timeline. That is where I saw the conversation. I did NOT realize I was a member. I just followed a link, like I do every day for recipes/design/whatever.
It sort of bothered me what was said. It wasn't until the next day I noticed at the top of the timeline I saw "Liked," and then "Unfriend" did I realize I was in the same boat as rebel8.
Edited to add: Then I immediately removed myself.