Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: psy on January 30, 2007, 11:26:39 AM
-
From: psyborgue@mac.com (http://mailto:psyborgue@mac.com)
Cc: jena@woodbury.com (http://mailto:jena@woodbury.com)
Well, we could talk about your sophomoric argumentativeness of the type any
teacher worth their salt would get tired of very quickly.
Or:
We could talk about making the forum unsafe by tearing apart opinions by
clever use of technicalities. (i.e. technically the operation was a success
even though the patient died).
Or:
We could talk about basic dishonesty of making a global assertion, and when
presented with facts, smoothly modifying your argument to attack from a
different direction (As you did in our brief exchange).
Or:
We could talk about covering up your very emotional opinions through the
veneer of intellectualization and technicalities.
Or:
We could talk about disparaging motives and abilities of people, most of
whom you know nothing about.
However, let's settle on naming programs, attacking people and motives
rather then their ideas (defaming), placing copyrighted material on our
board, and taking copyrighted material from our board (all posts) and
placing them on another site,
Lon Woodbury IECA
Certified Educational Planner
www.strugglingteens.com (http://www.strugglingteens.com)
Bonners Ferry, Idaho
208-267-5550
-----Original Message-----
From: Kristie Henley [mailto:kristie@woodbury.com]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 3:47 PM
To: 'Lon Woodbury'
Subject: FW: Banned?
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Crawford [mailto:********@mac.com]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:13 PM
To: Kristie Henley
Subject: Banned?
This is absurd. I did not attack anybody and was no more
argumentative than Anne was. I was mererly pointing out technical
inaccuracies (which you know, by the way to be inaccurate).
"violating aggreements" how? Could you give me a detailed
explanation of why i was banned?
Note there are no details.. Only accusations with no support...
This is what I sent to Lon yesterday evening:
Would you be willing to reconsider? It seems Anne appreciated my posting... And i'm sure WilleNelson has no problem with me either (considering I talk with her often privately).
This is what I sent in reply this morning:
On Jan 29, 2007, at 8:09 PM, Lon Woodbury wrote:
Well, we could talk about your sophomoric argumentativeness of the type any
teacher worth their salt would get tired of very quickly.
Odd. No teacher i have ever had has complained about that. I've heard "insightful", "voice of reason" ... lively. but never "sophmoric". Perhaps they weren't "worth their salt".
We could talk about making the forum unsafe by tearing apart opinions by
clever use of technicalities. (i.e. technically the operation was a success
even though the patient died).
"Technicalities" are also, often very important, as that is all the big picture is comprised of... Many many small technicalities, seemingly unimportant on their own, but without which the big picture would be blank.
We could talk about basic dishonesty of making a global assertion, and when
presented with facts, smoothly modifying your argument to attack from a
different direction (As you did in our brief exchange).
What? You alleged that fornits posters had negative motives... when in fact were only attempting to see if legal assistance could somehow be provided to Lori's child to help her have an advocate, in case she didn't want to go to program. I admit my reply was "witty"... perhaps even bordering on "smart ass"... but I don't see that as any sort of attack.
We could talk about covering up your very emotional opinions through the
veneer of intellectualization and technicalities.
Emotional opinions rarely change minds. I truly doubt you would want me to express those on your site. That's part of what fornits is for. "Intellectualization" as you call it, i would refer to as "reasoned debate". I came to your site, primarily, to continue a running debate with Karen (WillieNelson), since, admittedly, she was blasted unfairly on fornits. She feels safe on your site, and (obviously) has no problems with me. She and I have talked a lot privately to the point of becoming ... one could say "friends".
We could talk about disparaging motives and abilities of people, most of
whom you know nothing about.
Really? How do you know who i have contacted outside of ST, on e-mail for example. I have talked to Karen at length. Admittedly I have not talked to Anne yet, and perhaps i rushed to judgement about the one example I mentioned below. I am willing to apologize regarding that statement if Anne felt offended. It was not my intent.
However, let's settle on naming programs
Unless i made a mistake somewhere... i'm quite sure i censored any names of programs i mentioned.. (Unless you count the CEDU family of programs which i meant to mean "cedu based")
attacking people and motives
rather then their ideas (defaming)
The one instance where i implied that somebody didn't have a good motive you saw on that thread. I implied that Anne didn't care about Lori's well-being because if Fornits was as bad as she thinks, i don't know why she would refer Lori there. I feel that was a valid point. I have had my motives attacked again and again on ST. I have not complained about that.
Look. I know parents can be attacked on Fornits. It happens more than a fair amount. I did not feel Lori could "roll with the punches" like many other parents, and as such did not think it would be a good environment for her. With her views, she could easily be mistaken for a troll and relentlessly attacked. In that respect, ST is a much safer environment for parents.
, placing copyrighted material on our
board,
I don't know what you mean by that. I am at a loss as to where I did that.
and taking copyrighted material from our board (all posts) and
placing them on another site,
I asked a copyright lawyer who lives across the street whether or not submissions on forums were copyrighted works. He said no. He told me only the original author of a posting can copyright a work... also. He said that such copying (and i showed him the posts) would be considered "fair use" even if they were copyrighted.
--------
It is also interesting that all posts (with the exception of Mose) in reply to the announcement of my banning so far have been supportive of me. Including Anne from Minnessota (who was the last person i was "arguing" with before Lon banned me.
Lon also changed his Board's disclaimer to this:
Welcome to the Struggling Teens Discussion Board! My overall purpose is to make this Board a safe, supportive and helpful haven for parents of struggling teens. Every other consideration is secondary to this purpose. Jena's job as moderator is only to facilitate constructive and honest discussion for everyone's advantage. Enjoy, and I hope you find what you need here.
Constructive and honest discussion for everyone's advantage... except the struggling teens themselves of course. Good for Lon's business maybe.
I'm sure Lon is reading this... So. My message is this: Un-ban me and wait for a good reason to ban me. Banning me is bad for you politically anyway. How many people are saying now "well i guess the fornits crowd was right about lon"?
-
how unfortunate. I'll speak on it on the thred on the boards.
-
Well, it was bound to happen. I tusually occurs after one of the regular posters cries like a baby ::crybaby:: when they've been owned in an argument.
Lon is a fucking moron, plain and simple. He makes a living off keeping teens and parents in distress. Keep it in perspective and you being banned is completely logical - nevermind that the argument Lon put forth is not factual.
In a fair, level, grounded debate, there are only a very small handful of ST posters that can even partially support their positions. Lon tips the scale by making things up and selectively applying the rules to get rid of people that don't contribute to his income. He's an intellectual lightweight and he knows it so he hides behind administrative rights.
Lon, you're a fucking pantywaist. Grow up and grow a set of balls for chrissake.
-
Perspective: I run a forum full of 14-year-olds (Jesus no, I am NOT linking to that here!) and I'd get my ass kicked from here to Nantucket if I acted like Lon. Seriously, neither adults nor children would want to deal with me, the 14-year-old who actually owns the place would dispose of me like a worn pair of shoes, and I'd be out on my ass.
You reading this, twit? Back in the civilized world, you can either get rid of someone because you feel like it- you own the place after all- or just deal with their presence. But for the love of fuck don't go inflating your ego while making things up about "copyrighted material". It's borderline libelous and makes you look like even more of a twit than you already are.
The man has a serious authority fetish and likes to pretend he's a teacher. I wonder if he tried to get involved in the public school system, but got kicked out for one reason or another? Hmm...
I admire Psy's restraint in dealing with this fuckclown, though.
-
Milk, don't forget that Lon worked at CEDU for many years learning to become a seasoned child abuser and amoral control freak. It's a symptom of his sickness.
Couple that controlling mentality with a healthy dose if inadequacy and you begin to understand his moderator behavior. He can't stand and fight on principle, so he must withdraw or be further exposed as a know-nothing charlatan thusly denting his revenue stream.
Also, never, ever forget that Lon makes his bread and butter off scamming distressed parents and punishing their kids for fun and profit and he will never allow anyone to damage that income, no matter how idiotic his "reasons" are.
-
Perspective: I run a forum full of 14-year-olds (Jesus no, I am NOT linking to that here!) and I'd get my ass kicked from here to Nantucket if I acted like Lon. Seriously, neither adults nor children would want to deal with me, the 14-year-old who actually owns the place would dispose of me like a worn pair of shoes, and I'd be out on my ass.
Are they program kids? If so, do you link them to this site?
-
Are they program kids?
Oh Jesus fuck no. How could they be? Think on the question for a bit. You don't think the programmies are going to let the kids on the Internet, do you? And even if somehow one of them did, do you honestly think that I'd do anything but find their parents, open the parents' eyes with some stark horror, and make them ex-program kids, right quick?
This is the phrasing I used to link them here. Feel free to copy and paste on other forums that have children on them.
All right, this one is very off-topic and hopefully applies to nobody on this board. There are places in the United States where parents can legally send their children to be "behavior modified", basically caged and tortured, or sent to "wilderness therapy" where dehydration, potentially fatal, is common. I don't think any of the minors on this board have parents that crazy, but I can't be sure.
If your parents have discussed sending you to any sort of "residential treatment center", "therapeutic boarding school" or arranged a meeting with an "educational consultant", don't wait; immediately direct your parents to http://www.fornits.com (http://www.fornits.com) as soon as possible. Your future might depend on it. This also goes for any friends you might have in this situation. Get them and/or their parents over to Fornits ASAP.
No, this post isn't a joke. I hope it doesn't give anyone nightmares.
-
I didn't mean kids that are in programs!! Imagine them sending messages for help all over the net, imagine them finding Fornits God forbid.....I thought maybe they were kids who had made it home because their parents pulled them out or kids who had got away on their own perhaps
Good idea to pre-warn both kids and parents as to what might happen though ::deal:: .... prevention is always better than cure IMO
Good job
-
intersting update. Lon just edited one of my last posts to exclude the word "CEDU"
"6. Was the school that your child went to (in which you experienced the workshop described) CEDU based or an actual original CEDU school?"
Considering we were talking about a defunct FAMILY of programs... I don't see what the issue was. I wasn't even mentioning a specific school name. It was a Yes/No question that was HIGHLY relevant to the debate at hand.
Nobody was complaining and i would have gladly edited out the word if i had been politely tapped on the shoulder and asked. Other people had mentioned program names and been warned. This was the first time I had even mentioned anything close to a program name. Lon. You just don't like somebody pointing out negative aspects of the industry. Shame on your for your censorship.
-
So you're "clever" and "sophomoric"? The man is struggling for reasons, sort of like a beast thrown into a sawdust pit and left to fight for it's life. Lon's a mediocrity and so are his lackeys. I left a post on there, my God, my fake e-mail account was barraged by edcons wanting to hook me up with teen-torture shitholes. They stop when I start asking about places I'd like to know more about, like DeSisto. No one would explain why DeSisto went under, can you believe it?
You fought the good fight, Psy, it was bound to end like this. You were bad for business, and business is all Lonny the looch cares about. I piss on him and StrugglingTurds from a great height.
-
Milk, don't forget that Lon worked at CEDU for many years learning to become a seasoned child abuser and amoral control freak. It's a symptom of his sickness.
Couple that controlling mentality with a healthy dose if inadequacy and you begin to understand his moderator behavior. He can't stand and fight on principle, so he must withdraw or be further exposed as a know-nothing charlatan thusly denting his revenue stream.
Also, never, ever forget that Lon makes his bread and butter off scamming distressed parents and punishing their kids for fun and profit and he will never allow anyone to damage that income, no matter how idiotic his "reasons" are.
Again, Psy, don't try to rationalize Lon's behavior. He's a CEDUite and believes deeply in their twisted, highly damaging techniques of control. Remember, Lon actually believes CEDU is great and helps kids and families despite the fact that they were sued out of business for abuse, neglect and fraud.
There's not much sense in your applying reason and accountability to a true-believer freak like Lon. It doesn't register with these hucksters.
-
I just had a look see on the sight. I was not the first person to Mention CEDU. however, all mentions of CEDU have been summarily removed from the posts. Not surprising at all.
I was, however, the only person banned who mentioned CEDU.
-
I'm sorry psy. What they did was wrong. You were respectful, informed and presented a very balanced view of the industry.
Of course, this is what they are afraid of.
I was just telling Niles that I wished he would try and come back ... undercover.
I will miss your intelligence and sensitivity in regard to residential placement.
-
Psy- I think you put up a lot of stuff (quoting me) that mentioned Carlbrook. This might have been what Lon meant. I know I mentioned CEDU. I didn't know that wasn't OK.
-
Sorry to hear that Psy, but not surprised.
-
Psy- I think you put up a lot of stuff (quoting me) that mentioned Carlbrook. This might have been what Lon meant. I know I mentioned CEDU. I didn't know that wasn't OK.
Every time i mentioned Carlbrook i used "C********". I'm sure of that since i double checked every post. Most of the mentions of Carlbrook were referring to the thread anyway. I thought it was ok to mention CEDU since it was defunct, and you mentioned it first (without getting it edited).
Oh well.
-
No- The quotes from me used the full name and weren't changed. I asked for the editing of them and Jena fixed it.
-
What lon forgot to add was
i dont like it when people say things that cause my mates in the adolescent incarceration business to loose money. You are bad for business
-
No- The quotes from me used the full name and weren't changed. I asked for the editing of them and Jena fixed it.
Whoops. I must have missed one. Well in any case you could have just asked me directly. The other day another ST poster did the same thing and i PMed her about it.
-
COMEDY GOLD:
On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:11 PM, Lon Woodbury wrote:
Let's just call this a Time-Out. Check back next summer to see if you will
be able to check your impulse to provide "witty", "wise-ass" and "missing
the point" thoughts.
I wrote:
You've had pretty much every poster on your board condemn your banning of me. People are going to leave ST lon. Including people who are normally your supporters (of which i can think of only three, two if which are coming around). Where would you be without your free advertising? You think they won't come to Fornits? Maybe? But they might come to the Cafety forums which are lightly moderated. You don't want that now do you lon? Imagine what would happen if they began to talk to their kids about program. I know what my parents (both of them) think about program now.. and they aren't very positive. You can't put me on bans, or restrict phone calls anymore Lon. Yeah i know about your RMA past. This isn't a program, this is life... and censoring what you just plain don't like isn't normally tolerated outside of program and/or communist china.
Un ban me.
Did anybody else notice the phraseology he used.
-
Psy- You know I respect your viewpoint, but if you really wanted to get off bans, this was not the way to approach Lon. He CAN put you "on bans" and he did! He runs the site and he made it clear what he didn't like. Whether or not you or some of the rest of us agree or not doesn't matter. Why would he want someone posting on his site that speaks to him the way you did in your message to him? You were insulting and rude. I know you and everyone else here thinks "he deserves it", but don't expect to get back on the ST forum! Just as my requests to be treated respectfully on THIS forum were ignored completely, Lon is free to ignore your request to share your viewpoint. I'm sorry this happened.
-
Psy- You know I respect your viewpoint, but if you really wanted to get off bans, this was not the way to approach Lon. He CAN put you "on bans" and he did! He runs the site and he made it clear what he didn't like. Whether or not you or some of the rest of us agree or not doesn't matter. Why would he want someone posting on his site that speaks to him the way you did in your message to him? You were insulting and rude. I know you and everyone else here thinks "he deserves it", but don't expect to get back on the ST forum! Just as my requests to be treated respectfully on THIS forum were ignored completely, Lon is free to ignore your request to share your viewpoint. I'm sorry this happened.
Yes i was a bit rude. Throwing me off his site for no reason.. no... that wasn't rude was it? He is free to ignore my request. But i will not be the last person to speak out on ST. There will always be another to carry the torch.
I will NOT bow down and aggree to tow the line as he implied. "time out" was a euphemism in Benchmark for "thrown the fuck out but still billing the parents". You should know about that one. But hey. It gave your kid time for some very expensive introspection.
His phraseology is what pisses me off more than anything else. It's something that's transparant to most people. He is telling me what THOUGHTS i will be able to provide. NO. I would rather die. literally.
That i will not submit to. Dammit don't you get it yet. It's here and in program... It's about freedom. The freedom to have an opinion and keep it. The freedom to express yourself when you see injustice. The freedom to be yourself. The freedom to have a mind of your own. You don't get how important that is until you have it taken away.
Speach without freedom is about as intelligent as a yammering parrot... I would rather have my tougue torn out than have somebody else control the content of what i speak...
-
Charly, I'm sorry but thats bullshit.....
psy got booted from ST because he respectfully argued his point with intelligence, something lon apparently can't deal with. I find it odd how people like yourself and lon speak of being disrespected while you both support programs and practices that are disrespectful to youth. Why are you two deserving of respect while "troubled-teens" and respectful anti-program folks like psy are not? ST is lon's board and he can do what every he wants with it like showing his ass for all the world to see, as he did in the case..
-
mm
-
Man, it's like you guys want to read that board or something.
:scared:
-
Just as my requests to be treated respectfully on THIS forum were ignored completely,
How about when called Deborah "a bitch"? Remember that? Well shes the closest we have to admin over here and what happened to you? nobody revealed your IP, or assigned your posts.. or anything. and you are criticizing this site? you came over here guns blasting and now you want to play nice? you are a funny gal karen.
-
You know what, guys? I think it's time for an analogy.
Let's say that instead of months, sometimes years-long humiliation and abuse, these people weren't quite so sadistic and simply sent their teenagers to get fucked up the ass by a beefy black guy named Tyrone. They discuss it with regularity and aplomb. "Well, Tyrone fucked my kid right in his ass, and he was so much better after that! But now my kid won't talk to me anymore." "We all know you did the right thing. He'll thank you for it some day." Etc, etc, etc.
Now, enter Psy. He comes in with a different message. "You know, maybe it wasn't such a good idea to send your kid away to get fucked in the ass." He proceeds to convince other parents entering the forum not to send their kids to Tyrone's 12-inch dick.
Now we have Lon. He makes money when kids are violated by Tyrone. What do you expect him to do? Do you expect him to accept a different opinion? Of course not. He doesn't care about the kids being reamed; why would he care about that? So he gets rid of the interloper, and reminds everyone that the forum is for parents to approve and support each other in their decision to have their kid raped by Tyrone. And now everyone acts like the banning is such a big deal, while kids are still being put in handcuffs for a long drive over to Tyrone's place.
-
I apologized, sincerely, to Deborah by PM.
I don't think Psy was at all disrespectful in his posts. I appreciated the dialogue. I also agree with him that he should have the right to say whatever he wants and not to have his opinions edited. It just isn't going to be that way on Lon's forum. That's one of the things we all face in life. There are things I can't do at work that I might want to do. Psy-don't worry. No one is going to silence you. You ran into a slight wall, but you'll get past it. Keep your eye on the ball.
I really am considering a lot of what Psy has told me and I am changing my opinion about a lot of programs. I am open to hearing what you have to say. I just can't get to where I think ALL programs are bad for ALL kids. I just don't see that, especially in the case of Wilderness.
-
Man, it's like you guys want to read that board or something.
:scared:
:rofl: ::bwahaha2::
-
I apologized, sincerely, to Deborah by PM.
I don't think Psy was at all disrespectful in his posts. I appreciated the dialogue. I also agree with him that he should have the right to say whatever he wants and not to have his opinions edited. It just isn't going to be that way on Lon's forum. That's one of the things we all face in life. There are things I can't do at work that I might want to do. Psy-don't worry. No one is going to silence you. You ran into a slight wall, but you'll get past it. Keep your eye on the ball.
I really am considering a lot of what Psy has told me and I am changing my opinion about a lot of programs. I am open to hearing what you have to say. I just can't get to where I think ALL programs are bad for ALL kids. I just don't see that, especially in the case of Wilderness.
People. Don't ask for a person to change her opinions overnight. These things take time.
Karen. Even if all programs aren't bad for all kids... Is the risk really acceptable? What if the ASTART survey is accurate?
-
Psy- You know I respect your viewpoint, but if you really wanted to get off bans, this was not the way to approach Lon. He CAN put you "on bans" and he did! He runs the site and he made it clear what he didn't like. Whether or not you or some of the rest of us agree or not doesn't matter. Why would he want someone posting on his site that speaks to him the way you did in your message to him? You were insulting and rude. I know you and everyone else here thinks "he deserves it", but don't expect to get back on the ST forum! Just as my requests to be treated respectfully on THIS forum were ignored completely, Lon is free to ignore your request to share your viewpoint. I'm sorry this happened.
>>>>>>>>> :roll: :roll:
-
You know what, guys? I think it's time for an analogy.
Let's say that instead of months, sometimes years-long humiliation and abuse, these people weren't quite so sadistic and simply sent their teenagers to get fucked up the ass by a beefy black guy named Tyrone. They discuss it with regularity and aplomb. "Well, Tyrone fucked my kid right in his ass, and he was so much better after that! But now my kid won't talk to me anymore." "We all know you did the right thing. He'll thank you for it some day." Etc, etc, etc.
Now, enter Psy. He comes in with a different message. "You know, maybe it wasn't such a good idea to send your kid away to get fucked in the ass." He proceeds to convince other parents entering the forum not to send their kids to Tyrone's 12-inch dick.
Now we have Lon. He makes money when kids are violated by Tyrone. What do you expect him to do? Do you expect him to accept a different opinion? Of course not. He doesn't care about the kids being reamed; why would he care about that? So he gets rid of the interloper, and reminds everyone that the forum is for parents to approve and support each other in their decision to have their kid raped by Tyrone. And now everyone acts like the banning is such a big deal, while kids are still being put in handcuffs for a long drive over to Tyrone's place.
:tup:
-
I apologized, sincerely, to Deborah by PM.
I don't think Psy was at all disrespectful in his posts. I appreciated the dialogue. I also agree with him that he should have the right to say whatever he wants and not to have his opinions edited. It just isn't going to be that way on Lon's forum. That's one of the things we all face in life. There are things I can't do at work that I might want to do. Psy-don't worry. No one is going to silence you. You ran into a slight wall, but you'll get past it. Keep your eye on the ball.
I really am considering a lot of what Psy has told me and I am changing my opinion about a lot of programs. I am open to hearing what you have to say. I just can't get to where I think ALL programs are bad for ALL kids. I just don't see that, especially in the case of Wilderness.
Karen. Listen. This forum has a lot of survivors right? People who were in programs. You have complained that some people on fornits are actually angry enough to kill their own parents. Ask yourself what has to be done to make a child angry enough to want to kill his/her parent?
-
I apologized, sincerely, to Deborah by PM.
I don't think Psy was at all disrespectful in his posts. I appreciated the dialogue. I also agree with him that he should have the right to say whatever he wants and not to have his opinions edited. It just isn't going to be that way on Lon's forum. That's one of the things we all face in life. There are things I can't do at work that I might want to do. Psy-don't worry. No one is going to silence you. You ran into a slight wall, but you'll get past it. Keep your eye on the ball.
I really am considering a lot of what Psy has told me and I am changing my opinion about a lot of programs. I am open to hearing what you have to say. I just can't get to where I think ALL programs are bad for ALL kids. I just don't see that, especially in the case of Wilderness.
Karen. Listen. This forum has a lot of survivors right? People who were in programs. You have complained that some people on fornits are actually angry enough to kill their own parents. Ask yourself what has to be done to make a child angry enough to want to kill his/her parent?
I don't want to kill my parents, psy.
-
You could subcontract it out.
Let's just say that I've moved on.. or gotten over it... what flavor tang tonight? :rofl:
-
Im taking a wild guess here that the person who was claiming patricide as a defense against programs was a. not a program survivor and b. kidding.. the more you know... orange tang.. is there another kind?
-
Lower spine for Dad and shoulders for Mom, SS?
-
Lower spine for Dad and shoulders for Mom, SS?
No really, it's all right...I'm good. :rofl: :rofl:
-
Lon's behavior and vocabulary reeks of program bullshit and just control-freakery in general.
*sigh* he proved our point, and then some, with his pissy diatribe against Psy. The proof is in the pudding and THEN some.
He wants to make money, so that means shoving kids into those revolving door warehouse programs with networks of ed-cons sending them in left and right, and I think his conduct just demonstrates how right everyone who felt that way was.
God forbid a kid who has nothing wrong NOT go to a program even if her mom thinks she should, despite having no ability to diagnose, and the fact that programs don't do anything anyway! :roll:
-Niles too lazy to log in.
-
Lon's behavior and vocabulary reeks of program bullshit and just control-freakery in general.
Yes. This thread has made me laugh at least twice (well, three times with TSW's comment about contracting a hit man). ST uses CEDU lingo. It's not TOS, it's agreements. And you aren't banned, you're on bans. :rofl:
Is that really how it is over there, or is that just Karen speaking for herself?
I know, it's little compared to the whole big mess that is ST, but when I read that shit I seriously busted a gut.
What a strange, stupid world your brain is in, Lon. Please keep it to yourself.
-
The net responds to censorship like damage and routes around it.
-
I just felt like posting this in it's entirity...
Except the agenda of people like Psy, Overlord and Curious are to derail and hijack all parent inquiry to always turn into the same argument.
The most recent example is with Lori and her inquiry about her daughter.
The constant nitpicking at every word a parent writes accomplishes their set goal of stopping us from wanting to post or helping others parents. Their agenda is not to be helpful, or give solutions or show concern about parenting a family in crisis.
So many parents on this board (myself included) voice all types of skepticism and warnings on a regular basis without the intention of derailing the conversation into an argument. Parents who have experiences with their teens do lead newcomers to find the right solution without all jumping on the send your kid away bandwagon.
[ January 30, 2007, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: mose ]
--------------------
WARNING!
My submissions on this site becomes the property of Woodbury Reports Inc, and may not be reprinted, transmitted or used in any manner without the express written consent of me (Mose) or Woodbury Reports.
Yawn. Our intention is to stop them from "helping" other parents.
Yeah.. I'd say that's pretty accurate... considering i know first hand what that kind of "help" can do.
-
I've had all the help I can stand.
-
I read Moses post. I am not sure whether to be insulted or flattered! :rofl: :rofl: