AARC Summary (i.e. Ajax)

[Anonymous]

Summary:

Ajax was addressing 3 areas:
1.   Dr. Vauses education
Conclusion:  Dr. Vause continues to be active in the program and dedicated to a continuous life of learning and self improvement.  Acquiring his PhD from Union University, an accredited University that has been open since 1964 and works under the provisions of APA guidelines and ethics(American Psychological Association).

2.   AARC Outcome Study
Conclusion:  The outcome study of AARC was found to be conducted by an independent professional in the area of addiction.  To assist with the data collection and computation AARC had one of the Directors of Hazelden and their assistants  oversea and help author the study.  So the study is rock solid credible with some of it findings being:
85% of all graduates are still living a clean and sober life after 4 years
93% of all graduates are still living a clean and sober life after 12 months
52% of all graduates have had at least one relapse since graduating.

3.   Transparency:
AARC has shown it has opened its doors to independent studies and reveals its people qualifications openly.

ajax or whoever you are, If there are issues which you do not understand then contact AARC directly.  You live in town so it is not a toll call.  If you continue to post false information under an assumed name then it will be understood that you are just out to harm AARC and/or their interests and the next communication will be taken off line from fornits.

[psy]

sources for the above information?

[psy]

If you continue to post false information under an assumed name then it will be understood that you are just out to harm AARC and/or their interests and the next communication will be taken off line from fornits.[/i]

LOL!!!!  Not without a court order (and maybe not even with one, if it's outside your jurisdiction... this site is hosted in the states).  Go fuck yourselves.

[Anonymous]

If you continue to post false information under an assumed name then it will be understood that you are just out to harm AARC and/or their interests and the next communication will be taken off line from fornits.[/i]

LOL!!!!  Not without a court order (and maybe not even with one, if it's outside your jurisdiction... this site is hosted in the states).  Go fuck yourselves.

Try to test that.  Ajax lives here!  We have done this before.  It is easier to talk one on one, but if everyone continues to speak as an alias we can force this into the open, if needed, to resolve the issues.  Does not matter to us, as long as it is addressed.

[psy]

we can force this into the open, if needed

How?  I'd like to see you try and accomplish that.

See.  Reason why I think you're threating him about using  his "assumed name" (and demanding he stop), not to mention requesting he contact you, is precisely because you know you can't accomplish what you're after (his real identity).  So accept those things you cannot change, you 7 stepping cultist.  If you're looking for an easy way to serve papers on Ajax, you're not going to get one.

See.  Issue here is you Can't tie Ajax's online name to his real name...  and that sucks for you.

Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.... It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation-and their ideas from suppression-at the hand of an intolerant society. The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. But political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse.

-- United States Supreme Court decision No. 93-986 April 19, 1995

[Anonymous]

This troll sounds a lot like TheWho...

[psy]

Ajax lives here!

Can you prove that?  How do you know he is not a US citizen?

[Anonymous]

Ajax lives here!

Can you prove that?  How do you know he is not a US citizen?

Look, play your games, his IP has been traced here to Langdon, not exactly cowtown and I realize it isn’t accurate but he “is” a local guy who acts like a typical A.B.C.,  ask him yourself,(he posts elsewhere also).  We are certain who “she” is with her local colour.  She has history and a file with AADAC.  She will lead us to him.  You are giving out bad advice, psy.  Print the truth if you can.  We can deal with the truth but if the lies continue will we need to ,as I stated before, resolve it.

[psy]

Ajax lives here!

Can you prove that?  How do you know he is not a US citizen?

Look, play your games, his IP has been traced here to Langdon

Not possible.  You don't have access to IP address information, unless you're admitting you or AARC hacked into this site somehow (highly unlikely, and also a crime).  You have no admissable proof of anything.  You don't know who he is, where he lives... nothing.  You have jack shit.

not exactly cowtown and I realize it isn’t accurate but he “is” a local guy who acts like a typical A.B.C.,  ask him yourself,(he posts elsewhere also).

Sure. But you claim he is a liar.  And where he claims to be from on this site, even who he claims to be, doesn't prove anything (he could be imitating somebody...).  You have no admissible proof.

We are certain who “she” is with her local colour.

And you can prove this how?  Maybe it's somebody imitating her.

She has history and a file with AADAC.  She will lead us to him.

And you still can't tie him to his speech here.  What... you think you can force him to admit he wrote these posts?  I'll tell you how it'll turn out.  Your dipshit lawyer will copy and paste a bunch of fornits posts into a supporing declaration claiming "we're sure it's him, don't think he'll deny it, just can't prove it", and you'll get a response similar to "plaintiff has no evidence and even admits it!".

You are giving out bad advice, psy.

And you're trying to trick Ajax and get a freebie on identifying him.

Print the truth if you can.  We can deal with the truth but if the lies continue will we need to ,as I stated before, resolve it.

So provide proof of falsity (that means evidence, not unsupported statements) of some of his statements.  I know the onus is reversed in canada, but this isn't a court, and you might as well address the issues if you're that concerned about truth (which I highly doubt you are).  What you're concerned about is silencing a person who is attempting to speak out.

[Froderik]

False, easily refuted claims made by desperate imbeciles... gotta love it.

[TheWho]

Psy, If that really is AARC they have a legitimate beef.  It is clear that you are not able to see both sides of the issue.  Imagine if you owned a construction business you are trying to make successful and you had someone questioning your ability publically.  Even though you have a degree, they questioned whether or not you ever attended class.  They attacked your school saying it was unaccredited when it in fact was.  Telling people that the house you built for him fell down.  This person made up lies about the health of your employees and their spouses, placing this information on the internet.  Tried to discredit you thru manipulating your published statistics of success and trying to discredit the people who conducted and put together the numbers.

On top of all of this, this person refused to reveal themselves choosing to cower in the shadows instead of discussing their concerns face to face.  

Wouldn’t you want to talk to this person?



...

[Anonymous]

Psy, If that really is AARC they have a legitimate beef.  It is clear that you are not able to see both sides of the issue.  Imagine if you owned a program you are trying to make successful and you had someone questioning your ability publically.  Even though you have a license, they questioned whether or not your staffers overseeing the patients have any education beyond GED's.  They attacked your school saying it was unaccredited when it in fact was (BY NATSAP).  Telling people that the kids you treat relapse of suicide shortly after release.  This person made up lies about the credentials of your employees based on documents and evidence you tried to bury, placing this information on the internet.  Tried to discredit you thru manipulating your published statistics of success by pointing out the gross fabrications in them  and trying to discredit the people who conducted and put together the numbers by showing they lied.

On top of all of this, this person refused to reveal themselves choosing to cower in the shadows instead of discussing their concerns face to face.  

Wouldn’t you want to talk to this person?  

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go back to cowering in the shadows.  Scout's honor.



...

[psy]

Psy, If that really is AARC they have a legitimate beef.

So they claim but have provided no proof of falsity to date.  If they had actual evidence to prove his statements were false, why have the not presented them?  Seems to me that if they did that, it would benefit them more than if they took him to court (would be far easier too).  Think what you like about the people here, but I believe they're after the truth.  If AARC presented proof of falsity of some of Ajax's statements, I even bet they might get an apology...  so why haven't they?  All I see is "ajax said this" and "this is false", but no evidence to back it up.

They attacked your school saying it was unaccredited when it in fact was (BY NATSAP).

NATSAP is not an accrediting agency (the GAO was not pleased a certain school was claiming this).  If a school is claiming to be accredited by NATSAP they're misrepresenting themselves to the public and you know that.

On top of all of this, this person refused to reveal themselves choosing to cower in the shadows instead of discussing their concerns face to face.

As for why the person hasn't revealed himself.  I think the reasons for that is clear:  You can't sue who you can't identify (well, you can try, but unless you can identify a person at some point, it's pointless), and programs will sue people regardless of whether they have a case or not (they're betting on a defendant backing down and shutting up).  Trust me, I know...  and so do others.  Anonymity, again, is a shield against the tyranny of the majority and a necessity in this instances where people are speaking about against a foe with near unlimited resources and very few ethical qualms.  This is the reason for anti-slapp legislation.

[TheWho]

You quoted the wrong post.  I didn’t write that.  Maybe because you have me on ignore.

My point is,Hypothetically, if someone was running around bad mouthing you and your business.  Saying things about your employees and their families.  Saying the school you attended was not accredited, when in fact it was, wouldn’t you want to speak to this person and find out what his beef is?  Would you be curious as to why they never contacted you and tried to resolve their issues instead of spreading this information all over the web.

I am not by any means asking you to “out” anyone and I would not expect Ajax to either here on fornits.  But many of his questions could be resolved by contacting AARC directly.  It seems odd that he chooses this median to try to get answers to AARCs questions.  If he has exhausted all of those avenues then sure I would try to resolve it more publically.



...

[Anonymous]

AARC is shit and you know it, WHO.  :blabla: