jwsurvey.org blocked me from their website

by skittles 69 Replies latest members adult

• 

  John Redwood

  @Outlaw

  I noticed that you said nothing of your personal efforts to help anyone, instead you simply called us "buffoons" - is that how you feel you will help people? Aside from writing articles, coordinating with journalists and media outlets, researching critical subjects, helping other websites, editing, working with many activists on special projects, I respond to dozens of emails per week at survey from many JWs, very often distraught individuals who are waking up, but who need help getting out and helping their family get out. This is very time consuming work, but is very rewarding, and I get paid nothing for it.

  Let me tell you what happened when I was asked to join JW Survey. Lloyd came to me and asked if I would write, then later, edit the site.He explained the site and how everything including the ads work. The revenue from the ads is very small, and is just enough to pay for the site, the domain, and the Survey Monkey service, which is a 3rd party software we pay for. With all of that, he offered to give up part of his minuscule ad revenue to pay for my work. Of course I declined his offer, knowing he puts 100% effort into activism every day, and lives as meager a life as you can imagine. If you choose to read his new book you will understand just how little he has, and what he gave up for activism.
  

  Furthermore, it seem s hypocritical to judge survey when this site, as well as JW Facts, JW Struggle, JW Victims and many others have ads or donate buttons. And we do not criticize those sites in any way. If you operated a site or were an activist you might begin to understand the costs involved.
  

  Personally, I am pleased that you receive no recompense for your efforts, as they seem to involve nothing more than being an armchair critic and name-caller of others, rather than someone interested in actually being an activist and helping people. Being mean spirited and hateful will get you nothing but a heart attack.

  Good luck

  JR
• 

  notsurewheretogo

  I've had many run ins with Cedars...all he wants is to be the number one exjw on the internet period.

  It spoils what he actually does...which is a pity...the cedars before he DA was the one that I liked.
• 

  Simon

  John Redwood.

  You write some fine words. No one could argue that it wouldn't be better to all get along and work together etc, etc...

  But here's the problem: we only hear those sentiments from Cedars when it suits him, when it's him being criticized for something. What about when it's him firing shots at others or harassing them?

  I don't know who's right or wrong in this case but I know first hand from my interactions with him that he's perfectly willing to lie, intimidate, threaten and smear people who disagree with him or heck, just are as supportive and appreciative of his endeavours as he damn well thinks they should be. I know for a fact that he removes comments that question his narrative when they have nothing to do with being abusive in any way.

  If he truly believes people should be supportive of other "activists" then he should stop pulling stunts to have their voices silenced.

  Either way we need to decide what to do and make our time productive. So if you are done with the JW organization and you don't want to help an activist, then find a different cause or charity or hobby - you will be a happier person for it.

  This sounds very much like "you need to do things our way or leave". Well guess what, I don't think so. I think the ex-JW world needs variety. Not everyone thinks Cedars has all the answers and some people find the constant soliciting funds and expectation that his "activism" should be a full-time paid position rather distasteful.

  Many people disagree with my approach and methods whether it's what I do or the moderating style on this site. I don't always see the point of some other people's approaches too. But I can appreciate that they appeal to others. There's nothing wrong with them questioning me or me questioning them and voicing that "it's not for me" but there have been very few, even when I question their approach, where I question their motivation and sincerity - Cedars is one of them. There have been very few, even when we have different approaches, where we couldn't agree to get along - Cedars is one of them.

  So yes, some fine words, but kind of expected. It did read like the WTS style propaganda to silence critics and paint them as the bad guys as others have already suggested. Maybe because I remember "the best is yet to come" part particular reminded me of an assembly theme we had once that used that exact phrase.

  I hope you have good intentions to help others and applaud you for your efforts if you do. Lots of people spend long hours and real money for no reward other than the desire to help people and save random strangers from the pain they have had to endure. In my experience these are more effective than those looking for retaliation against the WTS (although we all go through periods of anger) or those who want to replace the position of authority and respect they got to within the organization with the ex-opposite. Some even want to start organizations to provide them the position ...

  PS. I'm sure I can't be the only one who imagines your Redwood name suggests you're just another persona invented by him. John Cedars ... John Redwood ... Maybe you should consider a better name or he should decide what he wants to be known as.

  Just the timing of you appearing to reply to this topic ... that's private. Did you just happen to register and find it, or were you prompted to refute it? How much collaboration went into formulating the reply? Things that make me go hmmmn.

  BTW: My distrust of Cedars extends to any that are close to him because my experience has been that he's willing to use people, sacrifice their reputation and put them in difficult situations. That is why I have not replied to your PM directly and prefer to conduct all correspondence in public so nothing can be misquoted or taken out of context. You could be a perfectly decent guy doing things for genuine reasons, I hope you are and can appreciate my caution when it comes to any dealings with Lloyd Evans or anyone working with him.
• 

  Simon

  Furthermore, it seem s hypocritical to judge survey when this site, as well as JW Facts, JW Struggle, JW Victims and many others have ads or donate buttons. And we do not criticize those sites in any way. If you operated a site or were an activist you might begin to understand the costs involved.

  I know all about hosting costs and think there's nothing wrong with trying to cover them. I know from running this site for 17+ (?) years that paying out for hosting and other software and services each month adds up which is why I have ads running. In the past people asked if they could donate and I was grateful for the support when they did but ads generally seem like a better setup because I don't have to ask people directly for money and it makes the site both free to use (with the 'inconvenience' of having ads appear) and also self-sustaining rather than a financial burden (that for long periods, it has been).

  But even with the ad revenue covering the costs, it's still a time burden and I've also probably spent thousands of hours working on the site over the years. But that's my choice to do so - I don't think it's anyone's responsibility to reimburse me for my time or would be right for me to suggest that everyone should chip in to pay me a salary to spend my time doing it. There are lots of things I'd like to do but sometimes I have to put them on the back-burner and focus on the day-job to pay the bills, my bills.
• 

  OUTLAW

  I noticed that you said nothing of your personal efforts to help anyone,
  

  No.....I don`t advertise or ask for donations if I help someone out..
  

  instead you simply called us "buffoons" - is that how you feel you will help people?

  Buffoon is appropriate.....Look at the idiotic question you just asked..
  

  Personally, I am pleased that you receive no recompense for your efforts, as they seem to involve nothing more than being an armchair critic and name-caller of others, rather than someone interested in actually being an activist and helping people.

  No..

  Your pissed off that someone would actually confront your BS..

  This is your lame attempt to "shut up" any critics..

  In case you haven't noticed,it`s not working.....LOL!!..
  
• 

  never a jw

  Skittles,
  

  Yes, Cedar may have an ego, just as most healthy humans with a self esteem do. However, what he does to expose the Watchtower more than offsets his personal flaws.

  There's better ways to spend time than complaining why the world doesn't accommodate to your every wish.
  
• 

  John Redwood

  @simon

  I don't know you personally, and I have nothing against you, and I hope it stays that way. As for Cedars, He has explained publicly many times why he used that name for activism prior to fully coming out of the organization. So while he has kept the name in several areas for continuity - he is Lloyd Evans, and most of his friends know him by his real name.

  I do have a problem with people suggesting that various persons are "watchtower trolls" and related conspiracy theories. Even the suggestion that I am another persona of "Cedars" makes me chuckle. The reality is, it's easy to thrash and bash people at the other end of a keyboard when you are on the other side of the world. But when you meet face to face - things change. Sadly we can't all meet, but I have spent a good deal of time in person with Lloyd and our team, and I can assure you they are all very good and very real people.

  I am not here to defend any particular argument Lloyd may or may not have had with anyone- that's not my business really, I am trying to help people, just as he is. I know many have attacked him on his personal FB page and he has retaliated when his thread is hijacked - and that is his business. Whatever happened here on JWN - I have no clue, but I can tell you that people read way more into things than what the actual facts show. If you feel that he lied to or intimidated someone, then I guess that's your take on him. But after working with him for nearly 3 years, I have never seen him lie or attack anyone, and as I know him personally, I know this is not who he is. Once you actually meet a person, you can judge their character.

  And quite frankly - don't we all make mistakes? As moderators of web sites, we have a difficult job and we will not always make perfect decisions. In regards to this case, I stand by my decision, as the person in question escalated his fury to the point where it's not a matter of whether we disagree or not, it's a matter of keeping discussions civil and non-antagonizing. That's my opinion and no one has to agree with me.

  Regarding my comment which you quoted - I am rather unclear how you make the leap from recommending healthy alternatives to "you need to do things our way or leave". These are really two differing statements, but you are connecting them in such a way that piles on the emotional response suggesting JW Survey is some sort of Watchtower-replacement and that we think of ourselves as "elders". This is far from the truth. It's just one web site - and we are in charge of no one. We wish to cover JW related stories in a truthful manner, and help people escape undue influence, so they can go about their lives and find their true faith, or whatever it is they desire outside of the control of a religious organization such as Watchtower.

  The reality is that if we are doing our job, we will help people get out and go their way and not have to visit our site again. Unless a person is an activist, they usually find their way out and into their real life, having children or going to college, or whatever they wish. Our site and your site are stepping stones to something else. So I hope that explains "the best is yet to come" comment. And by the way, I don't recall that ever being a Watchtower slogan in my 46 years of attending assemblies. But maybe it just sounded like that to you.

  There are a lot of hurt and damaged people here, and one of the most common comments I see is the idea that some activist or website is being "just like the watchtower" or that a person is being "just like an elder." I think that this says more about PTSD from the JW organization than anything else. So to those people who might accuse me of acting like "Watchower" - I certainly apologize for making you feel that way. Your feelings are your feelings, and I know the WT did a lot of damage to many otherwise good persons. If JW Survey makes a person feel that way, then we hope they find solace elsewhere, and we wish them well.

  We are very proud of our efforts and receive lengthy stories every day of how we have helped individuals escape the organization and move on with their lives. I hope you have the same success. So when it comes down to trolling behavior, we simply don't have the time to entertain lengthy back and forth debates which go nowhere, we would rather respond to those who sincerely need help. I will say that we have a wide latitude for allowing disagreement; for example I researched and wrote an article on the Watchtower's phony Telly Awards several months ago, and only 2 days ago did someone placed a lengthy comment opposed to the article, and I defended my article, but did not delete the persons comment. So the comment stands- and my comment stands, and that's the way the site works. Agree to disagree.
  

  My only question for you is, if you believe what you stated that you don't need "this shit" on your website -then why keep it? It really doesn't matter either way as no one is reading it. I think it caught the eye of a few "haters" who just wanted to vent - so you are letting them vent. But it's your site and you can do as you wish.

  Don't worry - we won't be publishing an article on Survey demeaning you or your site, or the poster who is craving for attention. We both have better things to do. Happy Holidays

  JR
• 

  skittles

  @JR

  Funny how at the end you are trying to manipulate simon into deleting this thread. No doubt it hurts the sensitive ego of the entire jwsurvey team to hear opposing voices. But of course you're not use to that when you delete all of them off your website

  Here are my comments as they were posted by Cedars on reddit http://jwsurvey.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Skittles-comments.pdf

  You can't with any honesty claim that I was breaking a single rule expect an unwritten one, you're either for us or against.

  You lied in your comments at first by stating to other commenters that it was your software that blocked me even though I have used the same email, user id, and have been posting from the same IP.

  Cedars claimed that I threw a fit because you didn't change a previous article to my liking. The reality is that in my private emails with Covert Fade I simply kept making the point that Some issues were my opinion and those were not expected to be taken as facts but some issues were objective and that is where I had a problem with you ethical standards. CF kept telling me that he wasn't going to change his article for some nameless face on the internet and I asked him why he has much moral standing on that issue considering the fact that his username is "covert fade"

  But this most recent episode shows all of your true colors. Despite what cedars most recently commented on the article comments, I didn't use "sophicated" trolling methods to bypass your firewalls. I was very honest about just simply using my cell phone data. And I did not "vindictively attack" your survey results but rather, I asked a question about how you apply your quality standards to your very own survey.

  And being the fact that you're entire website is predicated around said survey, it seems fair to the readers that you allow some questions regarding the method.

  But the most tyrannical of methods that you have employed is the curating of any and all comments that don't suit your purpose. You have ZERO basis for your claim that I was breaking any posting rules. And any communication I had with Covert Fade via email is tangential since I didn't make those comments public.

  One more time, removing all dissenting voices, ad hominem attacks against those dissenters, and then selective curating of the information shared with readers are all tactics used by bullies, fascist, and tyrants.

  I don't care that you guys make a few bucks here and there. I imagine that the income is paltry, but I do have an issue with any and all bullies.

  One last thing, let cedars know that he doesn't need to flatter himself. I'd like to meet him in person one day and ask him to tell me to my face how he is any better than the religion that he claims to be bringing down. But I never would attempt to talk to him in person because insecure wanna be tyrants don't have reasoned and open talks, they always resort to their tactics of obfuscation and deferment of blame.
• 

  Simon

  Just because someone may be nice and even charming in person doesn't mean they can't also be a complete jerk sometimes online. I'm sure he's a really nice guy to work with unless and until you fall out with him.

  The point I was trying to make was that what you said and how you phrased it sounded ver watchtower-esque (the reason I distinctly remember the "best is yet to come" bit was because the old "anointed" sister who was on the special-assembly day review item made it the funnies service-meeting we ever had and they used it as the ending phrase of every talk). I'm not suggesting that you want to be the WTS or that all comparisons with them are fair, I think they are generally overdone as an insult by ex-JWs who simply resent any and all form of authority (like Goodwin's law for exJWs).

  Whether I leave threads like this up or not really means I'm damned if I do, damned if I don't. Your mess spills out on to here (and elsewhere) and then I have to be the bad guy either picking a side and preventing some discussion so I look authoritarian / in-cahoots or allowing it and having the subsequent complaints from Cedars (and now you) for simply allowing it.

  I much rather only moderate lightly preferring instead the clear guidelines on behavior. If people are being disruptive and continually breaking those guidelines then even though they may go elsewhere and complain, I'm confident that enough people have seen the reason for any action I take and know the truth of the situation or trust that I have done things for the right reasons, even if I may not always do what they consider "the right thing" (because often I have other information that I can't make public and sometimes it's just a matter of compromises - there is no simple "right").

  Maybe you need to trust people more? Why need to retaliate / try and rebut every complaint? Sure, sometimes you need to issue a statement if some accusation is serious and gaining traction but often it just gives things the air of publicity that it otherwise wouldn't have.

  But I don't think you can automatically label anyone being critical as a hater or a troll and doing that just makes people more determined and entrenched, especially if the rebuttal comes across as more like retaliation.

  I know I've made mistakes after 17 years running this site. It's inevitable. You simply cannot please all the people all the time. I've hopefully shown that when I have made a mistake, I'm willing to apologize and rectify it. I also know though that some of the criticism I get is unfounded and some of the claims people make are outright lies. I could spend my time going on the sites where they are made to point out their falseness and how they are just liars, trolls and haters but what would be the point?

  People lying know they are lying and do it intentionally. We saw this endlessly with this election cycle and the fake-news problem. The people doing it are not the audience and the only people who believe it are those who want to and chose to.

  So stop sweating the small stuff. Do your thing, on your own site, however you want. Just please grow some thicker skin.

  You can't moderate sites you don't own and shouldn't try to (something Cedars tried to do here in the past). The more you try, the more it will make you look like you really are trying to silence people speaking out or simply disagreeing with your viewpoint.

  There does seem to be some disconnect between your description of the episode and the actual comments as recorded in the PDF. Maybe consider you might have overreacted or made a mistake? Just agree to disagree on something and leave a comment to that effect. Why wouldn't that be enough?

  My 2c worth of wisdom, take it or leave it, it's only 2c either way.
• 

  schnell

  To corroborate Simon's above words, I will add that I'm new to this site. I haven't been here for x many years. I like the John Cedars videos but haven't explored jwsurvey.org. I had no idea there was baggage about Lloyd Evans on this site, though I'd gotten a clue from YouTube alone that there has been controversy.

  Lloyd, if that's you, just be careful how you respond to critics. Deception does not play well. Because now, as essentially a stranger as well as a fan and a YouTube subscriber, I will always have this inkling that something is amiss. I'll look for all the objective information you provide, and I appreciate that each and every time, but any hint which you have made in past videos about the ex-JW community will stick out to me. John Cedars, John Redwood... Dismiss that connection as you will, but I am only left to wonder either way.