Fornits

Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry

haha, that's fuckin' hilarious. steve rookey did that kind of shit way too much.

At Monarch it was called "The Pinnacle", also known as ' How can we find another word for Summit and then recopyright everything from CEDU/RMA?'

i went to monarch and can confirm that it is for all intensive purposes a cedu clone (based on what I've read about cedu) down to minute details, such as naming buildings after buildings at cedu and RMA. Almost all of the language is the same. The insights are basically the same as the profeets, and many staff either went to CEDU, worked at CEDU or affiliates such as RMA.

The Acacia Strain - Continent (and Carbomb from 3750)
Misery Signals - Mirrors
The Cancerbats - Hail Destroyer
Bring Me The Horizon - Suicide Season
Dystopia - Human=Garbage
Leadbelly - Where Did You Sleep Last Night
Since The Flood - No Compromise
Every Time I Die - The Big Dirty
This Is Hell - Sundowning
This Bike Is A Pipe Bomb - Front Seat Solidarity
Crass - Feeding of the 5000
Albert King - Thursday Night in San Francisco
Down - II: A Bustle In Your Hedgerow
The Dead Kennedys - Fresh Fruit for Rotting Vegetables

.rock.

Does anybody know why Patrick Stambursky changed his name to Patrick McKenna? I am mighty curious.

I was in a CEDU clone with many familiar faces. You?

I seem to be responding to your posts a lot for whatever reason. Anyhow, I am currently a college student majoring in sociology. I've been planning since day one to do my thesis on some aspect of the TTI. I agree with you, I think it is essential to bring sociologists in addition to psychologists, specifically sociologists specializing in deviance. While I am at this juncture winding down my second year of college, and will not be working on the thesis until my senior year, I've already begun collecting data, psychological and sociological studies, journal articles, any primary source documents (such as the propheet/insight scripts) and really anything I can get my grubby little hands on that remotely pertains to the subject at hand.

I have a couple thoughts about the nature of the study that you have proposed.
1.) I would argue to narrow the scope of the study to people with similar intake criteria and repeat the study multiple times (or perhaps simultaneously) with participants of other intake criteria. Although all participants would undoubtedly be affected by the program in one way or another, the narrowed scope could perhaps provide fewer correlational relationships to muck through. One would half to be very mindful of the sheer amount of variables in such a study, and to try and control for as many as possible.
2.) Perhaps after analyzing the correlations between different intake criteria and different later-life results, one could develop some system of evaluation or at least a solid hypothesis for use in a more macro level study with people of differing intake criteria.
3.) Lastly, how would you convince a program to let you have access to the kind of information you would need to do a study like this? Clearly no program would want to stake its reputation on such a study, or at least no program that would be as interesting to study as one with lasting effects. Not only would you need solid empirical data of the methods of the program, but the followup would take a great deal of organization, not to mention the quite hefty task of the final analysis.

@ Guest - I do agree that an in depth study of the methods of any of the programs would be an invaluable asset, but what try another castle is suggesting is a debunking of the success rate claims, which would do much to disarm the negative/deceitful programs. Both or either would be great.