Toils Toils Troubles err.. bubbles..kk.. bleh

[Anne Bonney]

If TheWho is an ed-con, why would anyone sit on this information?  They wouldn't.

I am not an ed-con.  This is a personal matter that just got out of hand.  Sometimes you put your trust in someone without weighing the consequences if that trust happens to be compromised.
TSW, by now, has been given some options which he is undoubtedly thinking over.  I have 2 things to say to him to assist him in his thoughts:

Mal han matie chonnyang pito kapnunda.

Nat marun saeka tuko pam marun chuika tutnunda.

Take your time and think it over.

Damn, you're really sweating this, huh?  

:rofl:  How's it feel?

::roflmao::  ::roflmao::  ::roflmao::



A big debt is repayed with only a few words.

Birds can hear the talk in the daytime, rats can hear the talk
at night.

[Oz girl]

Oh for the love of god! Cant everyone just ignore the who? Please? The man loves this sort of petty intrigue. once again a who thread has gone on for 4 pages. It is like watching a child have a tantrum and then rewarding them with a lolly

[Anne Bonney]

Aw now c'mon.  This part is hilarious.


But I get your point.

[Ursus]

Mal han matie chonnyang pito kapnunda.

Nat marun saeka tuko pam marun chuika tutnunda.

In Umbra we trust?  :wink:

[Anonymous]

Morunun ke yakida.

[psy]

Your word is your word.

Under most circumstances, but consider that at least in my program, there were a great many things that were part of the "code of silence".  If I break that, in order to help another, is it it wrong?

If he gave his word to TheWho, yes, you're probably right, but even then, as in the above example, there are always times...  It depends.  I have very little, if any compassion for people who participate, however indirectly, in this cancerous industry.

I have no compassion for anyone but the victims.   I have a great curiosity about the individual who lives any part of 'that life'.  Aren't you 'supporting' them by observing the 'code'?  And the fact is your word is your word -- or it isn't.  
I don't think this will cost anyone sleep, but it will make me a little less-trusting of you  ::mecry::

Well.  The way I see it is this: Fornits is a place where the little Fornits run around and shine light on things that the industry doesn't want anybody to know about.

My policy with private communications in normal circumstances is this (it's time I wrote this down, since this policy is scattered in a hundred places on this forum):

Anything with survivors (except those who become industry members): No publication without permission.  All correspondence considered privileged by default.  If confidence is explicitly stated, communication will not even be shared with "privileged" parties such as close friends who might give advice on the situation.  In most cases, when I share information with friends, I redact identifying information.

Anything with survivors who are became industry members: Same as above unless great danger could be prevented with the release of the information, and in which case it will likely be done with redacted names..

Why the compassion, some wonder?  Because Everybody has a heart.  Plus -- from a strategic perspective...  If survivors wake up, while still insiders.. I'd like to see that happen.

Anything with parents who are not industry members: Same as rules for survivors.

Anything with parents who are industry members: same as survivors who are industry members.

Industry members, Ed cons (including you, Sue Scheff, and you too Lon!):  State of relationship is war.  Words will be used as weapons.  Dirty fighting allowed.  Why?  In my opinion, they know what they are doing hurts kids yet continue to do it because it makes them money.  They

I really try to keep to these general set of rules.  In program I learned to forget my own ethics, i did things that weren't me.  Now I am "restoring the backup" rules;  Trying to find who I was before program, and re-writing some basic ethical structures as I go (to relate to what I feel is right (which is usually based on "how would i like to be treated") ).

Well.  That's my "code of personal email ethics".  I've posted these general policies back before.

[Che Gookin]

The who or anything involving the who has absolutely nothing to do with any of this.

To The Who:

Well done sir, very well done.  :rofl:

My decision will be forthcoming shortly. Busy dealing with other crap.

[Che Gookin]

Your word is your word.

Word mofo.. without your word don't got shit.

You make a promise to keep something secret you have to keep it secret. No if ands or buts about it.

[TheWho]

The who or anything involving the who has absolutely nothing to do with any of this....

.

Thank you, TSW, for not tying me into that entire mess.  I owe you one, sir, sorry for the threats, just panicked when I couldn’t get a response.

[TheWho]

psy wrote:

In my opinion, they know what they are doing hurts kids yet continue to do it because it makes them money

Psy, I really haven’t paid close attention to the whole Sue S thing.  I have skimmed thru the many articles and web sites that have been posted here about her.  I know there is a major rift between fornits yourself and her and I mainly thought it was because you felt she betrayed the industry or misrepresented herself by acknowledging that WWASPS was probably not the best place for kids to attend but continued to refer kids to other programs (did I get that right?).
But do you really feel she thinks she is hurting kids when she refers them to programs? And only does it for the money?  I ask this because I find it hard to believe this.  There are very few people who are capable of purposefully hurting kids for the pure joy of it or for profit.  There is a special name for these people and there are very few of them in comparison with the rest of the population.  I would think that she feels she is doing a good deed and helping families to solve their issues. (whether she is right or wrong in her thinking there is a distinct difference in how her motive should be perceived by others.)

[Che Gookin]

:rofl:  :rofl:

If you weren't such a programmie sell out I think I could actually like you.


LOLS.

hahahahahah lord.. this is to good.

[Anne Bonney]

psy wrote:

In my opinion, they know what they are doing hurts kids yet continue to do it because it makes them money

Psy, I really haven’t paid close attention to the whole Sue S thing.  I have skimmed thru the many articles and web sites that have been posted here about her.  I know there is a major rift between fornits yourself and her and I mainly thought it was because you felt she betrayed the industry or misrepresented herself by acknowledging that WWASPS was probably not the best place for kids to attend but continued to refer kids to other programs (did I get that right?).
But do you really feel she thinks she is hurting kids when she refers them to programs? And only does it for the money?  I ask this because I find it hard to believe this.  There are very few people who are capable of purposefully hurting kids for the pure joy of it or for profit.  There is a special name for these people and there are very few of them in comparison with the rest of the population.  I would think that she feels she is doing a good deed and helping families to solve their issues. (whether she is right or wrong in her thinking there is a distinct difference in how her motive should be perceived by others.)

Nah, she's no better than the rest of them.  Sue loves the spotlight.  She loves being the one that everyone turns to in time of crisis.  She thrives on it and when someone threatens that, she flips out.  Hence her multiple personalities here when people started to figure out what she was up to.

I think for Sue, the money is just icing on the cake.  It's nice and all, but she's really in it for the ego boost.

[TheWho]

The who or anything involving the who has absolutely nothing to do with any of this.

To The Who:

Well done sir, very well done.  :rofl:

My decision will be forthcoming shortly. Busy dealing with other crap.

I am interested in how this all turns out for you.  I know you will make the right decision, the reason you were emailed vs others is because you have experience and your opinion is valued over others.  If I can help in any way, let me know.

[hanzomon4]

What the hell is going on here? :rofl:

Umm... Yeah I'm lost

[Che Gookin]

Thanks I got it covered. Unless you know who the man on the grassy mound was?

I'm also guessing they choose to contact me due to my discretion. That is something that in certain circles is far to lacking of late.