Let the record show that the OP (me) acknowledged this as a thread without the intent to bash. It's depressing that intelligent people (the AAWA Governing Body) put hubris before wisdom.
Public Image (AAWA Thread, but not a bashing thread)
by okage 27 Replies latest members private
-
-
Tylinbrando
Your intent is not to instigate bashing yet you point to AAWA's hubris and refer to them as the Governing Body? Really?
The fact there are moderators here that also volunteer for AAWA should send a clear message to all of you right up to Simon the Great Examiner.
Activism. Get some.
-
-
brinjen
Looking through their explainations on the AAWA's website (the 'Eventful Journey' page in particular) I do see quite an underlying tone of victim mentality... just my perspective.
I still say the smarter option would have been to add a forum to their existing webpage. Obviously, they can't change what happened but you do need to question what causes so many people to be added to a FB page without their consent with many being at risk of being outed when the org's own president won't reveal his own identity for the same reasons. Pretty much everyone involved is ex-JW... they all know the shunning policy and how much it has been emphasised in recent times from the WTBTS... shunning was actually a theme for one of their FB campaigns.
Consulting with PR firms... why not put themselves in the shoes of those who were outed? Many, many bought that point up here and according to the AAWA's website... many were calling for Cedars to 'out' himself. Victim mentality that part in particular looks to me. Again, just my perspective.
This isn't a bashing thread and I'm not bashing the AAWA. The way I see it, they have made a start at putting things right. But they have a long way to go still...
-
mind blown
Question? Is Cedar's an "Active JW" going to meetings and service? Or "Inactive"?
-
mamochan13
Brinjen - I agree completely on the victim mentality.
It's great to see the name change and the facebook page/group/whatever down finally. But their cavalier attitude (as per Cedars' comments here) to the seriousness of the issue still really bothers me. To apologize three weeks later after you've started the ball rolling for elders meetings and DFing is too little too late, IMO. The correct response the moment someone said, "you force added me and outed me" should have been to immediately close the page. An apology wouldn't have changed things for the outed person, but it would have at least indicated a sincere respect for people's privacy.
-
okage
@Tylinbrando: I'm sorry. But of all the members in all the boards, I am one of those in least need of being told to get some activism. I thought you posted to some of my campaign threads, but I'll have to double check.
To save you the trouble of having to read those posts, I tried organizing JWN. Twice. And four of the founders of AAWA? I named them in my proposal saying they would be valuable assets before they all decided "you know what? We'd be valuable assets in organizing a movement."
Yup. I predicted the future, Tylin. WHILE I was trying to organize JWN for an anonymous movement against the Organization. And my proposal didn't involve the word ANTI anywhere while it highlighted the importance of not outing people or forcing them to do what they didn't want to.
Yup, I predicted the future and safeguarded against any issues that would have the exJW community pissed at me.
But I don't run a website. I'm not under the Queen's blue sky. I've never been in front of a news camera. So I guess my ideas aren't worth AAWA time. See, I said explicitly that I don't expect them to read this or comment on it, because every good idea presented by a member of JWN that wasn't a media personality, or a site owner, or European, seldom received traffic from any of the AAWA founders. Look it up.
This thread wasn't meant to bash the AAWA. It's goal was to discuss agreements and objections to the AAWA publicly announcing that they dropped the ball. Twice. This thread was not a bashing thread, but it doesn't change the feelings of the OP (me). And clearly, it doesn't change the feelings of those who posted to it.
And please, take into account the entirety of what I posted. The AAWA founders ignore good, functional ideas left and right. My own example shows that those ideas included taking identity into account. I was willing to let everyone else take credit for it's success and was willing to take full credit for it's failure. These ideas were put out there. Not even by me, but by others over the years on JWN.
These simple ideas that would protect those involved and show that it's creator would be a man on good character while making the public aware of the atrocities of the Watchtower Society...out there for the taking.
And despite the availability of such ideas, the AAWA felt the need to disregard them and violate the privacy of a thousand people in their first week, while outing any number of them without their knowledge.
Get some activism?
Get your lips off the AAWA toosh.
-
okage
@Tylinbrando:
Do you remember this thread? You should? You were the first response:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/scandals/250746/1/What-will-happen-when-JWActivists-goes-back-onlineI gave a list. Let's see what on that list came to pass.
*Removed all mention of JWN (except when we were being portrayed as eager to bash and unreasonable).
*They did, indeed, revise the Eventful Journey, aka THEIR HISTORY
*Privacy is not addressed. It's still "Don't blame us for getting outed because you chose to support us," and "we are going to do the facebook thing again, because it worked out for us last time."What predictions didn't come to pass? The ones you identified as good ideas.
So their own liason in Tylinbrando can't get them to take up good ideas when offered. If it's not hubris, tell me what it is?