bury this rotting carcass, it's starting to stink.

[Ursus]

Hey, I think we ALL could do with slinging back a few beers and putting this to rest for another time. The level of mud-slinging is getting to be beyond the pale. Y'all have something to offer here, each in his own way. Save the best venom for the programs.

[Antigen]

Was it Sue-Sue and her threats, or the constant moving of hosting services, or did Ginger just get tired of all this or what?

Whah? No, none of the above. Just that I've been busy with life here lately. Suffice it to say I'm answering in action a valid, if often rhetorical, question for myself and for anyone who has ever asked it; "Well, what else do you do besides a Program? What's your solution?" I'm living well and enjoying my family, friends and work.   Plus I know this thing will keep on rollin' pretty well without me for quite some time.

It's about that time. I'll have to schedule a certain time a couple times a week to focus on just Fornits.

Anyway, this is as far as I've gotten reading today. I'll be back... shit, most likely tonight or tomorrow morning.

Love and Peace
In the Chicken Grease
Ginger

[psy]

Also, I forgot to mention!!!!!!! The altering of my posts, I really LOVED that!!!!!!

That happened when Che got admin privs and immediately abused them by deleting the ASR thread, Giving Niles admin privs (who, afaik, was the one to edit your posts) and [aaron] generally raised all sorts of hell. Aaron called this immature act of idiocy his "Jihad on Admins".  He's been nothing but a loose cannon on this forum, IMO, posting that he is drunk, on drugs, screwing hookers, etc... At the same time he acts like he wants parents to take what he has to say seriously...  Come on...

I'm not the first person to think that he does this on purpose but was unwilling to entertain the idea until he started going behind my back and lying about me.  I then looked closer and caught him lying about others...  I don't have to name names..  People are starting to figure this out on their own.

I don't think Niles should be disparaged for being real (himself), if he is in fact being real...
Nothing wrong with drinking, drugs, and illicit sex, IMHO...lol.

I wasn't referring to niles.  See above edit that makes it clearer

[Anonymous]

Yeah...she's a survivor, alright.  Against WWASP, but pro-program, just like Sue Scheff.  Makes anonymous, false allegations so she doesn't have to back them up, and allies herself closely with the who.  I got enough PM's with background on "CCM" to know she's as believable as thewho.

How did I "out" somebody?  If it's posted openly on the internet, it's fair game.  Dude.   By the way, I can't see anyone's IP.  There's a good reason for that, because I would abuse that privilege to "out" you.  Just being honest.

Once again, the ignore feature is useless as long as the ignored slip by as anons.  Block their IP's so they're truly ignored.  Thewho and CCM are so desperate to be noticed, they'll do anything to get attention.  That's truly pathetic, trollish activity.

It's precisely this type of psychotic paranoid poster that turns people off to this discussion.  It wouldn't be a big deal if they weren't in a position of power on this forum, and engaged in self-congratulatory wanking sessions with other moderators and plotting and sharing information about posters. CCM girl spent longer than most anyone on this forum in various programs. Because she isn't a complete ideological zealot like those in charge, she gets trashed worse than the people actually doing the abusing. Che is right, this forum is toast, and you have no one to blame but yourselves.

[ZenAgent]

Yeah...she's a survivor, alright.  Against WWASP, but pro-program, just like Sue Scheff.  Makes anonymous, false allegations so she doesn't have to back them up, and allies herself closely with the who.  I got enough PM's with background on "CCM" to know she's as believable as thewho.

How did I "out" somebody?  If it's posted openly on the internet, it's fair game.  Dude.   By the way, I can't see anyone's IP.  There's a good reason for that, because I would abuse that privilege to "out" you.  Just being honest.

Once again, the ignore feature is useless as long as the ignored slip by as anons.  Block their IP's so they're truly ignored.  Thewho and CCM are so desperate to be noticed, they'll do anything to get attention.  That's truly pathetic, trollish activity.

It's precisely this type of psychotic paranoid poster that turns people off to this discussion.  It wouldn't be a big deal if they weren't in a position of power on this forum, and engaged in self-congratulatory wanking sessions with other moderators and plotting and sharing information about posters. CCM girl spent longer than most anyone on this forum in various programs. Because she isn't a complete ideological zealot like those in charge, she gets trashed worse than the people actually doing the abusing. Che is right, this forum is toast, and you have no one to blame but yourselves.

"psychotic and paranoid"  Diagnoses from the...what?  You're the one who's paranoid, concerned about me seeing IP's.  I can't.  I bluffed.  You reacted crazily, and I got satisfaction.  End.

[Froderik]

Yeah...she's a survivor, alright.  Against WWASP, but pro-program, just like Sue Scheff.  Makes anonymous, false allegations so she doesn't have to back them up, and allies herself closely with the who.  I got enough PM's with background on "CCM" to know she's as believable as thewho.

How did I "out" somebody?  If it's posted openly on the internet, it's fair game.  Dude.   By the way, I can't see anyone's IP.  There's a good reason for that, because I would abuse that privilege to "out" you.  Just being honest.

Once again, the ignore feature is useless as long as the ignored slip by as anons.  Block their IP's so they're truly ignored.  Thewho and CCM are so desperate to be noticed, they'll do anything to get attention.  That's truly pathetic, trollish activity.

It's precisely this type of psychotic paranoid poster that turns people off to this discussion.  It wouldn't be a big deal if they weren't in a position of power on this forum, and engaged in self-congratulatory wanking sessions with other moderators and plotting and sharing information about posters. CCM girl spent longer than most anyone on this forum in various programs. Because she isn't a complete ideological zealot like those in charge, she gets trashed worse than the people actually doing the abusing. Che is right, this forum is toast, and you have no one to blame but yourselves.

A "complete idealogical zealot"? Wha...?
I don't think that's why she gets "trashed" here.

[Anonymous]

Yeah...she's a survivor, alright.  Against WWASP, but pro-program, just like Sue Scheff.  Makes anonymous, false allegations so she doesn't have to back them up, and allies herself closely with the who.  I got enough PM's with background on "CCM" to know she's as believable as thewho.

How did I "out" somebody?  If it's posted openly on the internet, it's fair game.  Dude.   By the way, I can't see anyone's IP.  There's a good reason for that, because I would abuse that privilege to "out" you.  Just being honest.

Once again, the ignore feature is useless as long as the ignored slip by as anons.  Block their IP's so they're truly ignored.  Thewho and CCM are so desperate to be noticed, they'll do anything to get attention.  That's truly pathetic, trollish activity.

It's precisely this type of psychotic paranoid poster that turns people off to this discussion.  It wouldn't be a big deal if they weren't in a position of power on this forum, and engaged in self-congratulatory wanking sessions with other moderators and plotting and sharing information about posters. CCM girl spent longer than most anyone on this forum in various programs. Because she isn't a complete ideological zealot like those in charge, she gets trashed worse than the people actually doing the abusing. Che is right, this forum is toast, and you have no one to blame but yourselves.

A "complete idealogical zealot"? Wha...?
I don't think that's why she gets "trashed" here.

CCMGirl said she believes there are some good programs, while still acknowledging the existence of abusive ones. She named one that she attended she felt was helpful. As soon as she let that slip, most posters turned their backs on her or started an outright attack.

[psy]

Yeah...she's a survivor, alright.  Against WWASP, but pro-program, just like Sue Scheff.  Makes anonymous, false allegations so she doesn't have to back them up, and allies herself closely with the who.  I got enough PM's with background on "CCM" to know she's as believable as thewho.

How did I "out" somebody?  If it's posted openly on the internet, it's fair game.  Dude.   By the way, I can't see anyone's IP.  There's a good reason for that, because I would abuse that privilege to "out" you.  Just being honest.

Once again, the ignore feature is useless as long as the ignored slip by as anons.  Block their IP's so they're truly ignored.  Thewho and CCM are so desperate to be noticed, they'll do anything to get attention.  That's truly pathetic, trollish activity.

It's precisely this type of psychotic paranoid poster that turns people off to this discussion.  It wouldn't be a big deal if they weren't in a position of power on this forum, and engaged in self-congratulatory wanking sessions with other moderators and plotting and sharing information about posters. CCM girl spent longer than most anyone on this forum in various programs. Because she isn't a complete ideological zealot like those in charge, she gets trashed worse than the people actually doing the abusing. Che is right, this forum is toast, and you have no one to blame but yourselves.

A "complete idealogical zealot"? Wha...?
I don't think that's why she gets "trashed" here.

CCMGirl said she believes there are some good programs, while still acknowledging the existence of abusive ones. She named one that she attended she felt was helpful. As soon as she let that slip, most posters turned their backs on her or started an outright attack.

While the industry is unregulated there are effectively no safe programs.  While there very well might be a safe program, hypothetically, since there is no way to tell definitively, and no state oversight, it's just not safe to take the plunge.  It's like playing russian roulette with your kid's life.  Also, I wouldn't recommend taking advice on where to place your child from anybody.  You never know who might have a hidden agenda or a financial tie to a program (or the industry as a whole as represented by NATSAP).

[TheWho]

Yeah...she's a survivor, alright.  Against WWASP, but pro-program, just like Sue Scheff.  Makes anonymous, false allegations so she doesn't have to back them up, and allies herself closely with the who.

So you like to categorize people as “good” survivors and “bad” survivors.  The survivors that agree with you are okay to stay and post as guests.  The ones that feel the industry isn’t inherently evil is in bed with Sue or Thewho.  You live in a black and white world?

.  I got enough PM's with background on "CCM" to know she's as believable as thewho.

We all got the same information on you except you flipped out, cried foul and wanted the person banned for giving the information out.  I seems its okay to get background information on people as long as it isn’t yourself.

How did I "out" somebody?  If it's posted openly on the internet, it's fair game.  Dude.  

You have moderator status now, Zen.

By the way, I can't see anyone's IP.  There's a good reason for that, because I would abuse that privilege to "out" you.  Just being honest.

Hmmm…..

Once again, the ignore feature is useless as long as the ignored slip by as anons.  Block their IP's so they're truly ignored.  Thewho and CCM are so desperate to be noticed, they'll do anything to get attention.  That's truly pathetic, trollish activity.

Look inward my man, the problem lies within.  There will always be people with opposing views and hopefully there always will be.



...
 :guesswho:

[Anonymous]

Yeah...she's a survivor, alright.  Against WWASP, but pro-program, just like Sue Scheff.  Makes anonymous, false allegations so she doesn't have to back them up, and allies herself closely with the who.  I got enough PM's with background on "CCM" to know she's as believable as thewho.

How did I "out" somebody?  If it's posted openly on the internet, it's fair game.  Dude.   By the way, I can't see anyone's IP.  There's a good reason for that, because I would abuse that privilege to "out" you.  Just being honest.

Once again, the ignore feature is useless as long as the ignored slip by as anons.  Block their IP's so they're truly ignored.  Thewho and CCM are so desperate to be noticed, they'll do anything to get attention.  That's truly pathetic, trollish activity.

It's precisely this type of psychotic paranoid poster that turns people off to this discussion.  It wouldn't be a big deal if they weren't in a position of power on this forum, and engaged in self-congratulatory wanking sessions with other moderators and plotting and sharing information about posters. CCM girl spent longer than most anyone on this forum in various programs. Because she isn't a complete ideological zealot like those in charge, she gets trashed worse than the people actually doing the abusing. Che is right, this forum is toast, and you have no one to blame but yourselves.

A "complete idealogical zealot"? Wha...?
I don't think that's why she gets "trashed" here.

CCMGirl said she believes there are some good programs, while still acknowledging the existence of abusive ones. She named one that she attended she felt was helpful. As soon as she let that slip, most posters turned their backs on her or started an outright attack.

While the industry is unregulated there are effectively no safe programs.  While there very well might be a safe program, hypothetically, since there is no way to tell definitively, and no state oversight, it's just not safe to take the plunge.  It's like playing russian roulette with your kid's life.  Also, I wouldn't recommend taking advice on where to place your child from anybody.  You never know who might have a hidden agenda or a financial tie to a program (or the industry as a whole as represented by NATSAP).

How do you know what programs (besides the ones you attended) are abusive and safe? You don't, so you tell parents that they are all as dangerous as the one you experience, or worse. We all know this isn't true. CCM says she was in a safe and effective program. I believe her, just as I believe the people who say they were in an abusive program. You can't believe one first-hand experience, and dismiss another, it doesn't work that way. What if your kid has serious problems and talks about suicide and uses drugs; isn't it also playing russian roulette by doing nothing? You say "I wouldn't reccomend taking advice on where to place your child from anybody"; well then why should people take advice on where NOT to place their kid?

[Froderik]

Other people have said other things about Cross Creek Manor, though...haven't they?

I really don't think there's as much "spin" going on as you like to claim, Who.

[TheWho]

While the industry is unregulated there are effectively no safe programs.  While there very well might be a safe program, hypothetically, since there is no way to tell definitively, and no state oversight, it's just not safe to take the plunge.  It's like playing russian roulette with your kid's life.  Also, I wouldn't recommend taking advice on where to place your child from anybody.  You never know who might have a hidden agenda or a financial tie to a program (or the industry as a whole as represented by NATSAP).

You can make that argument on any level, but you need to throw into the mix questions like “Are public schools effectively safe?”… “Is the local drug dealer effectively safe?”…. “Are you childs friends effectively safe”…. “Is living on the streets of NYC effectively safe?”…. should I go on?

When the day comes that a Therapeutic Boarding School becomes less safe than the few I mentioned above then I will start to agree with you, until then we need to have alternatives available for children who are presently living in or being exposed to a less safe place than Boarding schools.

Froderic, that wasnt me.



...
 :guesswho:

[Anne Bonney]

Other people have said other things about Cross Creek Manor, though...haven't they?

I really don't think there's as much "spin" going on as you like to claim, Who.

Bingo.  It wasn't that she thinks there are some good programs, it was the alignment with Who and her extreme defensiveness when she was questioned about the "safe" program she was touting. 

Most of us 'zealots' are against any programs that do not give due process to kids and who use any form of the LGATs or Therapeutic Community approach that is directly taken from Synanon.  You can't make that safe, ever.  We are against programs that limit, restrict or monitor communication between parent and child.  We are against kids having to pay for parents' mistakes in raising them.  We are against programs that separate the child from family for months on end with no proper diagnosis or even proof of efficacy of the therapeutic value of the program they are in.  If, in fact, these places produce such wonderful results (and have for oh, 40 or so years now), there ought to be ample 'proof' of efficacy, no?  If you're going to advertise a program as being 'safe and effective', you damn well better have something to back that up.

CCM believes that in some instances its perfectly OK to ship a kid off with no due process.  She's stated that much repeatedly.  That, I think, is where most of us had a problem.

[Anne Bonney]

You can make that argument on any level, but you need to throw into the mix questions like “Are public schools effectively safe?”… “Is the local drug dealer effectively safe?”…. “Are you childs friends effectively safe”…. “Is living on the streets of NYC effectively safe?”…. should I go on?

When the day comes that a Therapeutic Boarding School becomes less safe than the few I mentioned above then I will start to agree with you, until then we need to have alternatives available for children who are presently living in or being exposed to a less safe place than Boarding schools.

Froderic, that wasnt me.

Wrong, again.


Who:  Some programs are safe and effective
Us:  Really?  Name one and cite proof of efficacy, i.e....long term, peer reviewed, clinical research.
Who:  Nope, you prove that they're NOT effective.  Public schools arent' safe.  Drug dealers are bad.
Us:  So, ya got nuthin'.


That's basically your argument here.

[Froderik]

Who, you are a really terrible liar...it's quite obvious that it's you. 

(I would've known this even without the three dots.)