Will you provide a link for this:
teejay, your words on b-boys board are a tell all about you. Asshole
Will you provide a link for this:
teejay, your words on b-boys board are a tell all about you. Asshole
I got a soft spot for the Farkmeister. He can be damn rude, weepy eyed and extending an olive branch, supportive or completely cruel when you want support. Being as hes that way with me and posts on his moods, I treat him the same way. If I feel like praising him, I do. But If Im in the mood to boot him in the head, well, I do that.
I learnt from the meister. (among others)
The problem is when the writer steps far outside the boundaries of common courtesy and proceeds to excoriate others. I don't know about you but there are enough jerks in my real life that I don't need to click on here and have to see the postings of yet another one.
I in no way back Farkles actions . Believe me. I too was extemely upset over his last bit of time here, as well as much of what he said before that. Calling people the things he did......there is no excuse for. You seemed to have missed my point.
we are not suppose to link other sites, I think that was the last new light. I will PM you.
Thanks. I missed that.
It's bad enough when people fail to acknowledge or even SEE the pain that Farkel causes by the disrespect he gives the person who disagrees with him and the words he uses to express his disrespect. It's worse when they *do* see it and only make excuses – or worse: try to give what really are bad manners a certain cache or cool or attempt to attach a wittiness to something we wouldn't THINK of tolerating in anyone else. That's what I mean by cult mentality. Here, you've been outspoken in your disagreement with me. When's the last time you did that with Farkel when he was clearly in the wrong?
I didn't get to address this as my time was cut short on my last post.
It pisses me off also in a big way when people do what you said in bold type. Pisses me off bad...........eh lark?
If people are the f********* ignorant to give credit to someone being an obvious asshole and hurting someone as did Farkle with minimus.....then their an asshole too. Hurting others is for assholes when it's done over and over and over.
But.....your post didn't convey that meaning to me in parts and maybe you know that and maybe you don't. Maybe I'm full of shit.... but if I am I wish someone would tell me.
I would like to say if Doug came back here and told everyone he was an asshole and lost that shitty part about him.....I'd love him all over again. That hurt me bad as he meant a lot to me....and still does.
I'm so confused! Could someone please tell me who I'm supposed to be mad at right now?
Aww Gumby. I couldn't ever be REALLY mad at you. See, I'm using my last post on you.
You have made 39 post(s) in the last 1 day(s) out of your limit of 40.
You can currently post 1 more which will increase in 1 day(s) 7 hour(s) 57 min(s) when your oldest post expires.
Oh well, c'est la vie eh?
Guess I'll be back tomorrow to fight the good fight.
Alright Teejay, for the benefit of other posters I'll explain just what is wrong with your comments and with your thinking. In going through your comments, I finally realized why you hate anyone who is able to write reasoned essays and posts: you tolerate no rivalry toward Raymond Franz, because you feel that he liberated you from the JWs and you worship him.
First, I'll make some comments on the post that pissed me off.
: It's true. Over the years folks like Norm, JanH, and kent (the great Norwegian Trinity); Farkel; and AlanF have written many commentaries, exposes, essays... whatever you want to call them, that – like literary laser beams – accurately and pointedly exposed the fallacies of the Watchtower Society's peculiar brand of Christianity. And written them well, I might add. Hundreds of thousands of words, millions maybe – and I haven't done more than scanned any of them.
: Ever since the lights went on for me, reading the commentaries of ex-JWs has always been as distasteful as reading the watchtower and awake themselves. And that's what makes me wonder about the thousands who have been "helped" by reading them. After reading the pivotal Crisis of Conscience and learning 'firsthand' what really went on behind the scenes, I personally forever threw off the shackles of allowing myself to ever be guided again by the thoughts—and thought processes—of another human being, no matter how eloquent. Just give me the facts and let me figure it out for myself.
So far so good. But that's not really the point of your post. The point is what you stated more openly in other posts (that there are enough stupid people on ex-JW forums to form cult followings behind a number of people). I will point out those statements below.
: I could be wrong and forgive me if I am, but IMO people aren't really free if seeing new truths can only be accomplished by reading another's words. Such ones have simply exchanged one leader for another. They are in a position of forever allowing themselves to be led – if not by the Watchtower Society, then by another individual or group.
What you've done is to set up a straw man to knock down, so as to make your real point below. The strawman fallacy is in the above bolded word "only". I know of no one on this board, other than you, who did not figure out pretty much by himself or herself that the Watchtower is a messed up cult. Only when they had already gone at least 80% of the way did they -- actually, could they-- read material like Crisis of Conscience, or Internet material, or anything else critical of the Watchtower. Such material provided the necessary facts to go the rest of the way.
Oddly enough, even though you claim to value independent, critical thinking, you stated clearly above that you yourself did not have the wherewithal to figure it out for yourself. You said that Crisis of Conscience was "pivotal" for you and that it even turned "the lights" on for you. Were you therefore not "helped" by Franz's writings? Did you thereby become a "cult follower" of Ray Franz? Most people do not, but it's painfully obvious that you did. Do not judge others by your own inadequacies.
You're thoroughly hypocritical here, Teejay, because, while you admit that the writings of a mere man were "pivotal" in 'turning the lights on' for you, you refuse to extend the right to others to be similarly 'enlightened' by the writings of anyone else! Therefore readers can only conclude that you're a cult follower of Raymond Franz just as much as you were once a cult follower of the men of the JW Governing Body.
Now let's look at your real point, one which illustrates perfectly your jealousy in behalf of Raymond Franz. You tolerate no rivalry against your 'god':
: I mean no offense, but the Cult of Farkel is no different than the Cult of AlanF. And the Cult of AlanF is no different than the Cult of Charles Taze Russell or the WtB&TS.
Here you've stated outright that, just as the "Cult of Charles Taze Russell or the WtB&TS" are real, live, working entities complete with hordes of cult followers, there exist cults of "Farkel" and "AlanF" complete with real, live cult followers.
See anything wrong with this reasoning?
I suspect that every poster on this board can see how inept your reasoning is, now that it's opened up clearly. There exist no such "cults". There is not one person I know of who would not hesitate to disagree with anything I said, or Farkel said, or any others "like Norm, JanH, and kent (the great Norwegian Trinity)" said who you claim are some sort of 'cult leaders'. Indeed, posters often demonstrate that they're followers of no man.
I invite all posters who are members of Teejay's claimed "cults" to step forward and be counted!
I invite all posters who think there exists a "Cult of Farkel" or a "Cult of AlanF" or a "Cult of JanH" or a "Cult of Norm" or a cult of anyone else to step forward and be counted!
I invite all posters who are not members of Teejay's imaginary cults to step forward and be counted!
What you've really done, Teejay, is bury your ridiculous idea inside some good ideas, as a subterfuge. One such good idea is this:
: Until a person is willing to step out on that mental limb and truly risk being "wrong" and thinking for oneself, they are subject to being forever led by someone else.
And yet, by your own admission, you were not led out of the Watchtower by your own efforts, but because you followed Raymond Franz!
Here are more good thoughts in which you bury your real point:
: Why exchange one leader(s) for another? Why not, instead, completely throw off the follower mind-set and think for yourself? It's a widespread aspect of the ex-JW community that I've never been able to come close to understanding.
Why not indeed? Why did you exchange Watchtower leaders for Raymond Franz? I suspect you don't understand this "aspect" because you don't even realize that you're a cult follower of Raymond Franz.
Now, to prove that my claim that your real point was not to express approval of the notion that people should think for themselves, but was to excoriate those you feel are rival 'cult leaders' of your admitted 'god', I present the following.
To Notperfectyet you said in this thread:
: If you clicked on the link, you'd understand what I meant when I mentioned striking a nerve. See, the Watchtower Society isn't the only cult that's discussed around here.
Then you strongly implied that Notperfectyet is a 'cult follower' of Farkel:
: You seem to have membership to another one. Some folks (including you) get as upset when ill is spoken of their particular idol as the average Dub gets when negative comments are made about their beloved gb.
You said to me:
: As founder of one of the aforementioned cults,
Here you again admit outright that you think I am a 'cult leader' and therefore that I must have cult followers. But I have no followers. Indeed, if anyone tried to put me in such a position I would straighten them out right quick. Nor have I founded a 'cult'. I have no organization -- not even a website -- that anyone could cling to. This is where your reasoning is completely f**ked up, Teejay. Only someone who is completely f**ked up and is really tolerating no rivalry toward his 'god' could possibly think in this manner. Only someone who is completely f**ked up can insult every member of this board as you've done.
: I'm not surprised that you would respond as you have.
Once again you demonstrate a thorough inability to reason properly. You fail to understand that I responded as I did because you insulted not only me, Farkel and the ones you named, but more importantly, you insulted every member of this and other ex-JW discussion boards who ever expressed or even thought of expressing approval of what we have written!
You seem to think that you've expressed a new view on demonstrating independent thinking. While it's a very good view, it's actually quite old. I've been pounding this drum on Internet forums for as long as I can remember. So have the other 'cult leaders' you've excoriated. So have plenty of others. For example, at this link
one can find a part of my writeup on the Society's ridiculous Creation book. I wrote this about twelve years ago and gave an explicit reference as to why a writer ought to state facts, along with arguments about why a reader ought to agree with her or him:
The magazine Technology Review, February/March 1992, published an article on page 5, entitled "Looking for a Few Hungry Samurai." It gave general advice to moonlighting authors who might want to write articles for the magazine, and offered a few suggestions on how an author could make his writing a success:
Don't preach to the converted. Readers want to know your opinions, even those with strong political implications. But it's important to assume that readers are intelligent skeptics who don't already agree with you -- otherwise, why bother to write? -- yet who are willing to be convinced. The key is to present enough material, including a fair rendering of opposing viewpoints, so that readers can decide for themselves. "The best way I know of persuading you of anything," says MIT physicist Philip Morrison, "is not to plead with you to trust me, not to invoke authority in general, not even to call upon some expert, but to show you just what it is that persuaded me."
: If you'd read further down in the thread I referenced you'd find that several of your fellow posters
MY fellow posters? My, my, Teejay. Such exclusionary thinking strongly indicates that you don't consider yourself part of "the posters", which again indicates that, because you know they're not 'cult followers' of Raymond Franz, you don't consider yourself part of the group.
: shared the sentiments I expressed.
Yet again you demonstrate total lack of reading comprehension and thinking ability. Not one poster agreed with your claim that I or anyone else is a 'cult leader'. Indeed, most posters only expressed agreement with the same points in which I agreed with you above. Let's examine a few comments, shall we?
: Lots of f**ked up folks around here, I guess.
More like, not many besides you, I guess.
In the thread
: I could be wrong and forgive me if I am, but IMO people aren't really free if seeing new truths can only be accomplished by reading another's words. Such ones have simply exchanged one leader for another. They are in a position of forever allowing themselves to be led – if not by the Watchtower Society, then by another individual or group. I mean no offense, but the Cult of Farkel is no different than the Cult of AlanF. And the Cult of AlanF is no different than the Cult of Charles Taze Russell or the WtB&TS. Until a person is willing to step out on that mental limb and truly risk being "wrong" and thinking for oneself, they are subject to being forever led by someone else.
Why exchange one leader(s) for another? Why not, instead, completely throw off the follower mind-set and think for yourself? It's a widespread aspect of the ex-JW community that I've never been able to come close to understanding.
Thanks for a great post. In my opinion, you wrote the most important truth ever stated on this board. As long we follow we will never really be free, free in our thoughts and minds, free to think independently of others. And free to say what we think, even though to others it seems we are going against the current.
Nothing about anyone being a 'cult leader' here. And IslandWoman will tell you quite clearly that she's a follower of no man. And if I'm wrong about IW's opinion, and she happens to think that anyone on this board or anywhere else is a 'cult follower' of the 'cult leaders' you claim exist, then I invite her to answer the same questions I asked of you above, naming names. That would spark some interesting discussions.
In that thread Englishman said:
Teejay is right IMHO. I have never been a follower of anyone since leaving dubdom. You won't find any posts by me praising any of the aforementioned guys. As Hillary Step put it so well, some of us are not remotely team-players, preferring to find our own levels without the need for some sort of group acceptance. I'm a social animal who doesn't look for the approval of his peers, which I guess is slightly unusual. If I think that someone is behaving like an asshole I'm happy to say so, which does occasionally upset one or two people.
Nothing about anyone being a 'cult leader' here.
In that thread Riz said:
Teej, you are absolutely correct. I, for example, left the jWs all on my own.
Riz is exactly the sort of free thinking person I describe above. She did not need Crisis of Conscience to make her see the truth about "The Truth". She does not follow Raymond Franz or anyone else, so far as I can see.
I had been out for about five years before I even had a computer. I didn't even know these forums existed until I had been out for a long time.
I left because I wanted to, not because of something I read on an internet forum. I'd venture a guess that that's the case with most folks here.
This isn't being said to diminish the time and effort it takes to write those essays. But when the authors are put on a pedestal and basically worshipped, it makes me wonder if these folks didn't learn what is, in my opinion, the biggest lesson to be learned from being a witness. Quit being a follower.
This last paragraph might possibly be construed as agreeing that there are some 'cult leaders' on some ex-JW discussion boards, but once again I will invite Riz, or anyone else, to point fingers at the supposed 'cult followers'. Since I think that Riz is unlikely to actually hold the opinion that such 'cult followers' exist, I must conclude that she is speaking in general terms -- and with that I most definitely agree.
In that that thread Nilfun got the real point and asked:
Who's worshipping Farkel?
Exactly! If anyone thinks anyone else is doing that, let him or her have the courage to speak up and point fingers. I certainly don't want to associate with anyone who would 'worship' Farkel!
In that thread, Gumby understood perfectly what you falsely claimed:
: but the Cult of Farkel is no different than the Cult of AlanF. And the Cult of AlanF is no different than the Cult of Charles Taze Russell or the WtB&TS. Until a person is willing to step out on that mental limb and truly risk being "wrong" and thinking for oneself, they are subject to being forever led by someone else.
Good lord teejay.... that is total bullshit! I guess every writer on this planet should quit writing for fear of influencing someone. School books should also be thrown out as they are opinions of other people. Are you serious. You equate Farkle and Alan as cult daddies?
Can you answer Gumby, Teejay? I mean, with intelligent reasoning?
Finally you said:
: One day, on a level closer to yours, I'll be able to use logic and reason and develop more of an ability to put "the facts" together. Till then, I do what I can. And hope.
How big and hopeful of you, Teejay. But given that you've learned almost nothing on this board in the last couple of years, so far as I can see, about logic and reason, I hold little hope that you'll be able to change.