by NoRegrets 162 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Haven't read the entire thread. Just the OP.
My response: LMAO
Just because a couple handfuls of know it alls on a message board aren't happy with an organization doesn't invalidate the organization and what it's trying to do. And before I'm accused of shilling or something, let it be known that although I'm in their FB group, I'm neither a member nor a volunteer of AAWA and don't intend to be.
Hi Ty - Yes you are correct there SOME, not all. Hoever, I think if you actually go and read all of the threads from the beginniing to the end, you will find that unfortunately things became quite heated AFTER certain incidents. have a read. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Of course this absolutely does not justify aggression, name calling or insults, but, if two people are having an argument, it's usually best not to wade into the middle of it without knowing all the facts or being present when it happens.
Thing is, *lost*, is that this isn't an argument anymore because AAWA is no longer engaging JWN in debate. Why can't the haters let it drop, too?
Tylinbrando it seems you're still bitter beause when you first came on JWN, YOU wanted JWN members to start a HUGE RALLY AGAINST THE WTS AND ELDERS without even knowing who you were, plus your story was off.
It got so bad your thread was locked and lost, but there's still evidence of your questionable thread.
Lost, I assure you I have followed all the posts from the beginning as they were happening. I know specifically where things went south, the accusations, the denials, the finger pointing and denials of blame. I hoped solutions were made to rectify the initial situation concerning security to everyones satisfaction. That did not happen obviously and like I have said many have been alienated away from the AAWA group.
Which really brings something to the fore. I disagree with some of the choices and statements made by the fledgling anti WT group and have voiced my concerns. While they have not been handled as I would have liked, I still respect its claimed mission and can support it. I do not continue to drum away about my concerns like a petulant child until I get my way.
I appreciate discussions and constructive arguementation. The Ad Hominem lobbied from both sides may bring chuckles to some but it really only exacerbates an underlying mistrust and disdain for those on either side. I suppose that is to be expected from the lot of us who have broken free from a high control cult and have developed the need to turn over every stone on a path to understanding who exactly it is behind the curtain and what they are promoting.
I suppose I like a good arguement. But I also like finding solutions without bullying. That is the basis for my stance thus far concerning AAWA and "jumping into" this fray.
Mind Blown, I am not pissed off. It was a good learning lesson for me about this community. Regardless of my initial reception I found amazing support here and I have accomplished my goal of prosecuting my daughter's molester and seeing him in jail. What do I have to be pissed about? My point was simply to illustrate that when we choose a battle or label someone a troll before we know them we should be extremely careful because in the end what we say or the harm we cause by our nastiness will only make us look like an asshole when it is all said and done.
I think the problem is, as before, how the AAWA is handling things and refusing to answer your critics makes things worse. Critics are not people out to get you, they are critical of something that you have done or given the appearance of doing and PR is the job of responding to address the criticisms.
This is the internet people, you can't just pretend that things didn't happen by deleting the comments! Especially not with a group that wants to claim to offer support and be open and honest. Never mind the issue of still putting people at risk.
Throw in refusal to now even have any dialog with people that they were keen to talk to when they wanted to announce and promote themselves and you are left with the appearance, whether accurate or not, that the group is acting in an arrogant way that just centers on their own appearance.
Really, being able to alianate so many of the ex JW community within just a few days of launch is quite an achievement. Yes, things are going on over the same thing but there is a REASON for that - it's because there are no answers forthcoming. Cedars could easily have posted on the thread that "hey, yes, I used a pseudonym for certain reasons but it's OK and all legit, we checked" and that would be it ... but he didn't. They could have shut the group when it was clear early on that there were problems ... but they didn't. They could have done lots of things that would have taken no time at all and there would have been no endless discussion and people would have said "great job guys". Instead, they spent their time deleting any comments off their blog that were critical and writing up a self-promoting PR piece that spun what had gone on.
It's not OUR fault that THEY have mishandled things! Are they also intending to become an Anti-JWN group now as well? Who's next? Reminds me so much of the jehadist types who turn on the population because they don't get the support that they imagine they deserve and demand.
As for other people with no ex JW background getting involved. Yeah, I can see one or two individuals but that is it. If the name was more generic and not so focused on being anti-WatchTower maybe .... but then why didn't those people get involved with existing counter-cult groups? Doesn't it work both ways? Is anyone here interested in joining an anti-Mormon or anti-Scientology group? Have you? Will you? Of course not ...
So aren't we all left with the feeling that after destroying the trust of the ex JW community they are now saying "well fuck you, we never wanted you people anyway, it's non-JWs that are going to help us, nah nah"? Does anyone really believe them?
As for the lawyer putting themselves at risk. That's crap. They do the paperwork and file it and could offer advice but the person signing their name on the paper is the one swearing that it is true. I don't know and care if it's legal or not but do wonder how much trust people can put in an organization run by someone that not only doesn't reveal their name but doesn't even want people to know what COUNTRY they are in. It's laughable to imagine that they wouldn't be sitting ducks in court. Just file against the president and win by default every time he fails to appear.
I think what surprises me is that when one sets themselves up above the treeline, and does not expect to get hit. Whteher you are a policeman, politician, minister, you set yourself above the masses and guess what. You are a target. Warranted or not. And you will be held to a higher standard.
Anyone who has the delusion that a simple idea, web page, and whatever the legality of a corporation, is enough to mass the troops in unison is in for a wake up call.
This is the internet people, you can't just pretend that things didn't happen by deleting the comments!
Take your own advice, hypocrite.
-Sab
Take your own advice, hypocrite.
Sorry you feel that way. We try to moderate as little as possible but sometimes it's necessary to keep a site healthy and civil, especially when people get a little heated or take things too far. I don't think it's the same as covering things up though.
Sorry you feel that way. We try to moderate as little as possible but sometimes it's necessary to keep a site healthy and civil, especially when people get a little heated or take things too far. I don't think it's the same as covering things up though.
Nothing to do with feelings. Your reign of tyrannical moderation has been painfully obvious. When people stand up, you cut them off or neuter their posting abilities. Reminds me of an organization I used to be involved with. Go put some clothes on, emperor.
-Sab
