The Who offers to auction off his account for fornits!

[TheWho]

Stop turning things around. We're talking about you now. Just because he may or may not have (and I recall him saying "possibly") made unsubstantiated allegations against you does not mean it's right for you to do the same to him, especially in the way you did, which is much the sort of thing many of us heard inside programs (in a similar, unsubstantiated manner). Look......

Come on, you know what I am talking about.  There have been pictures of program staff posted on here in which no one has met before and they were ridiculed for their looks and hobbies.  Entire programs were mocked and the people who worked there.  People assumed things about me and mock me... its easily 99/1 in balance and no one ever says anything.... yourself included.

If I were sensitive to being called “Monkey Breath”  I certainly wouldn’t use that term against others.  Do you see what I am saying?  So using the defense that they were in a program doesn’t really hold up.



...

[TheWho]

Just as an example, When the author Dave Marcus was being called an industry shill, and paid to write his book buy the industry no one came forward to say.. “Well,I haven’t seen evidence of that”  or  “Can you show us a link” or “Why would a person who works for abused women and has won the Pulitzer prize jeopardize his career by taking money to slight a story”.
You and I both know if the same thing we said about a anti-program writer like Mia people would be calling foul left and right.
You and I both know that if the dialog isn’t heavily anti program it gets tossed, ignored or the poster gets ridiculed.  But if a survivor is even question about their story it is an outrage.

Anyone  can see this who has read here for even an hour, it is amazing that the regulars cannot.



...

[psy]

Shoutbox was moderated. From that you were banned for what most would see as a death threat ("take staff out").  Generic or not, there was a very real possibility that someobdy like SS could call the FBI and have the server taken away.  Since the shoutbox is moderated... oh hell. I'm repeating myself.   From the forum you weren't banned and now that the shoutbox is no longer moderated at all, you're more than free to say whatever you like there.

A death threat against whom? What police station did you intend to call? If this sort of generic "death threat" could be considered a threat, the internets would be shut down in about two seconds. I think it was because we got into a argument, which escalated into a war of words, and emotions got a little heated and you wanted to freak me out. Am I wrong?

No.  It seems this is mostly a misunderstanding.  I assumed you were an agent provocateur (and/or TheWho) and just wanted to psych you out.  Maybe I got a little carried away.  Had I thought you to be an actual survivor, I would have calmly explained why it is inadvisable to say that on the shoutbox (especially not with SS watching like a hawk and having the FBI on speed dial).  As to what people can and can not say on the internet, I recommend you read the story of Keith Henson (scientology critic):

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1030_3-6156516.html

Normal rules do not apply when dealing with cults.

I quoted you earlier in this thread when you edited out the part about CCM. You could of just denied it (there were no edit tags) and said I made it up

But I didn't.  That should tell you something.

just like the other thread in which my guest quote is questioned, which would result in a similar stalemate. But I don't have the luxury to ignore facts I know to be true. Knowing that CCM is telling the truth, I get upset when an admin of this site (and a fellow survivor as well) chooses to disregard her word

It's not that I chose to disregard her word as much as I took it as equal to that of Zen's.  The two cancel each other out.

and then include anecdotal evidence that other survivors are liars.

Well.  I didn't mean it that way, which is why I deleted it.  I wanted to imply that it's possible for a survivor to lie, and just because CCM is a survivor, and Zen is a parent (who'se kid was placed in program against his will) does not mean I should take her word over his in a serious decision (it wouldn't be fair).  I think you can see where I'm coming from and I worded it badly when I originally wrote it.  After I read it, I realized how it came out and I deleted it.

I get that. I'm not attacking you personally. I am expressing my personal outrage at the situation, and frustration with- what from my perspective - appears to be a double standard. I was banned and threatened for saying students should rise up (take that however you want).

The "rise up" part wasn't the problem, it was the "take staff out" part that I felt could be used against the forum and worried me.  There was a lot of trolling going on in the shoutbox that day. I'm sorry if I misunderstood your intentions or reacted rashly.

Instead he gets threads like this, or identity auction, or t-shirt, and it gives him the sort of credibility and attention he wants. I realize he can come back on proxy. I get that there is no solution to this, which is fucking sad as hell. By following the rules set out by this forum, he will win, and drive traffic (other than who flame wars) to a standstill.

Look.  I realize how frustrating it is.  Imagine how it is for myself, kelly and ginger.  It's a situation where saving the forum could possibly require a compromise in values, and I agree with Ginger that it's unacceptable to do that.  Ginger believes that once we get our google rankings back, traffic will increase and productive dialogue will drown out those like TheWho.  She says there have been lulls in posting like this before.  I tend to agree, as before the site was taken offline several times by Sue Scheff's actions, TheWho was here, but wasn't as much of a hindrance.  The idea of this auction is to get rid of him (as well as raise money for hosting).  I'm hoping both those goals can be accomplished so that, in his absence, the forum can recover more quickly.  Once it's at a more prominent, stable place, as it was once before, even TheWho returning could not bring it back down.

[psy]

But if a survivor is even question about their story it is an outrage.

Anyone  can see this who has read here for even an hour, it is amazing that the regulars cannot.

Well.  If the forum is biased, it's not by any act of authority, but rather by the actions of the programs themselves: creating such dissatisfied "clients".  Ask yourself why the satisfied "clients" have not flocked here in groves to defend the precious salvation places that "saved their lives".  You figure they would be grateful for such an act.

Going twice to Ursus for 90 dollars.  Last chance to nab TheWho's account...  Bidding closes at 5PM CET

[Anonymous]

Ginger believes that once we get our google rankings back, traffic will increase and productive dialogue will drown out those like TheWho.  She says there have been lulls in posting like this before.  I tend to agree, as before the site was taken offline several times by Sue Scheff's actions, TheWho was here, but wasn't as much of a hindrance.  The idea of this auction is to get rid of him (as well as raise money for hosting).  I'm hoping both those goals can be accomplished so that, in his absence, the forum can recover more quickly.  Once it's at a more prominent, stable place, as it was once before, even TheWho returning could not bring it back down.

I sincerely hope that things turn out this way.
As for the other shout box shit, I won't bring it up again (to the delight of other posters I'm sure), the topic is closed as far as I am concerned.

[psy]

If I were sensitive to being called “Monkey Breath”  I certainly wouldn’t use that term against others.  Do you see what I am saying?  So using the defense that they were in a program doesn’t really hold up.

Well.  It does when you consider personal experience.  If you are a black man and offended by the phrase "nigger" and have been exploited in a way that a WASP cannot possibly understand, calling a white WASP a "cracker", while equally racist on it's face, still does not probably hurt or degrade the white man in the same way it would to the black man, where it would bring up past bad experiences and mistreatment.  You get what I'm saying?  You can't understand what we've been through, apparently, and god knows we've tried to explain.  Either your completely thick, or insensitive to the point where...  Well the black eye didn't particularly surprise me.

[psy]

Ginger believes that once we get our google rankings back, traffic will increase and productive dialogue will drown out those like TheWho.  She says there have been lulls in posting like this before.  I tend to agree, as before the site was taken offline several times by Sue Scheff's actions, TheWho was here, but wasn't as much of a hindrance.  The idea of this auction is to get rid of him (as well as raise money for hosting).  I'm hoping both those goals can be accomplished so that, in his absence, the forum can recover more quickly.  Once it's at a more prominent, stable place, as it was once before, even TheWho returning could not bring it back down.

I sincerely hope that things turn out this way.

Me too, and i'm pretty sure it will.  Suggestion: why not help out and pitch in on some other productive discussions.  It tends to start chain reactions.  Eventually, we can get the site back up to where it was.

As for the other shout box shit, I won't bring it up again (to the delight of other posters I'm sure), the topic is closed as far as I am concerned.

I appreaciate that, and once again, I apologize.

[Anonymous]

Me too, and i'm pretty sure it will.  Suggestion: why not help out and pitch in on some other productive discussions.  It tends to start chain reactions.  Eventually, we can get the site back up to where it was.

I've been trying. TheWho is fairly adept at recognizing these threads as they begin to emerge, and shift the discussion to a flamewar. He's  the most pervasive and dedicated troll I've ever seen on this forum. It's sad for him, and sad for us- and yet it continues - why god.... why?

I appreaciate that, and once again, I apologize.

Thanks. I'm sorry about that whole thing too and what I said.  I hope you don't take it personally that I get riled up and passionate when discussing this topic.. I can't help it, and sometimes undiplomatic rants spill out of me.

[Guest]

Ginger believes that once we get our google rankings back, traffic will increase and productive dialogue will drown out those like TheWho.  She says there have been lulls in posting like this before.  I tend to agree, as before the site was taken offline several times by Sue Scheff's actions, TheWho was here, but wasn't as much of a hindrance.  The idea of this auction is to get rid of him (as well as raise money for hosting).  I'm hoping both those goals can be accomplished so that, in his absence, the forum can recover more quickly.  Once it's at a more prominent, stable place, as it was once before, even TheWho returning could not bring it back down.

I sincerely hope that things turn out this way.

Me too, and i'm pretty sure it will.  Suggestion: why not help out and pitch in on some other productive discussions.  It tends to start chain reactions.  Eventually, we can get the site back up to where it was.

As for the other shout box shit, I won't bring it up again (to the delight of other posters I'm sure), the topic is closed as far as I am concerned.

I appreaciate that, and once again, I apologize.

[Guest]

Hate to bang a drum that might get played by thewho for a kid requiem, but re. there being no proof ZA outed CCMgirl, the only reason there is no "proof" is that he deleted the post.

Later he said no post ever existed

For months after this, you claimed that it was "proved” that no post ever existed.

Then someone posted a screensave of z.a. stating “no one but me and who saw the post” proving their WAS a post.

Why spread a lie all that time? Why not uncover the post and see what he really wrote, now?

Considering all the lies he’s told about the subject: he’s also changed stories MULTIPLE TIMES about what he posted, and how he got the info..it’s kinda clear already about who’s telling the truth about this.

You also have TAC who can tell you what she he saw, I believe, if he doesn’t mind getting dragged into this. Besides, what is any moderator/parent doing using personal info he got about a survivor through investigating her HUMILIATING her with it on this forum.

But I get the politics attached to this situation...

[psy]

Hate to bang a drum that might get played by thewho for a kid requiem, but re. there being no proof ZA outed CCMgirl, the only reason there is no "proof" is that he deleted the post.

Later he said no post ever existed

For months after this, you claimed that it was "proved” that no post ever existed.

Then someone posted a screensave of z.a. stating “no one but me and who saw the post” proving their WAS a post.

Yeah, but in that screencapture, there was never a clear indication of what post he was referring to, and honestly, i've been too busy to check recently, especially since CCM hasn't seemed to be interested in persuing it recently.

Why spread a lie all that time? Why not uncover the post and see what he really wrote, now?

Well, there is no way to un-delete a post, if there was one.

Considering all the lies he’s told about the subject: he’s also changed stories MULTIPLE TIMES about what he posted, and how he got the info..it’s kinda clear already about who’s telling the truth about this.

Well, not really, since i've known him to bluff before on multiple occasions, including one which actually got me in trouble (long story).  I'd rather he not do it, but I have known him to do it, and thus, it's hard to tell what is intended as disinformation to get a desired response from his detractors and/or fish for information and what is the genuine article.  He gets results, but sometimes it backfires.

You also have TAC who can tell you what she he saw, I believe, if he doesn’t mind getting dragged into this.

Well.  If he did see a post, and can corroborate CCM's claims of it's contents (that it actually contained CCM's real name and address), then I'll confront Zen with it and take appropriate action.  I'll let him contact me, though (rather than drag him into this), unless CCM is interested in pursuing this.  Personally, i'm just dying for it to go away.

Besides, what is any moderator/parent doing using personal info he got about a survivor through investigating her HUMILIATING her with it on this forum.

But I get the politics attached to this situation...

It's not politics as much as you might think, if you're as cynical as myself.  I'm just trying to be fair here. I'm not defending Zen since he's my friend.  I'm doing it because there is a lack of evidence against him.  I'd do it for anybody.  Due process is something I believe in.

[psy]

Thanks. I'm sorry about that whole thing too and what I said.  I hope you don't take it personally that I get riled up and passionate when discussing this topic.. I can't help it, and sometimes undiplomatic rants spill out of me.

I'm not one to hold a grudge.  Apology accepted.

[TheWho]

Well. It does when you consider personal experience. If you are a black man and offended by the phrase "nigger" and have been exploited in a way that a WASP cannot possibly understand, calling a white WASP a "cracker", while equally racist on it's face, still does not probably hurt or degrade the white man in the same way it would to the black man, where it would bring up past bad experiences and mistreatment. You get what I'm saying?

Sort of, but if a black man doesn’t want to be called a nigger, I don’t think he will go around calling white people crackers.  If a black person called me “cracker”, I would have no qualms calling him “Nigger” and vice versa I am sure.

You can't understand what we've been through, apparently, and god knows we've tried to explain. Either your completely thick, or insensitive to the point where... Well the black eye didn't particularly surprise me.

Some have been thru worse than others.  All I am saying is there should not be a double standard.  If you are overly sensitive to people spitting on your shoes, you should probably try to make a conscience effort not to spit on other peoples shoes.  Otherwise people will think it is acceptable.  Cant have it both ways.  But survivors here on fornits always feel they are entitled somehow and I never understood that.  If they want to be respected they need to try to respect others...everyone knows that, it is not exclusive to one area of society.



...

[psy]

Well. It does when you consider personal experience. If you are a black man and offended by the phrase "nigger" and have been exploited in a way that a WASP cannot possibly understand, calling a white WASP a "cracker", while equally racist on it's face, still does not probably hurt or degrade the white man in the same way it would to the black man, where it would bring up past bad experiences and mistreatment. You get what I'm saying?

Sort of, but if a black man doesn’t want to be called a nigger, I don’t think he will go around calling white people crackers.  If a black person called me “cracker”, I would have no qualms calling him “Nigger” and vice versa I am sure.

Please do this.  I recommend trying it out in Harlem.

If you are overly sensitive to people spitting on your shoes, you should probably try to make a conscience effort not to spit on other peoples shoes.

Well.  When one spits on your shoes here, you tend to respond by spitting on everybody else's shoes here.  I'm not you realize how your words offend more than just your immediate target.  If you try the above suggested "nigger" comment in Harlem, for example, I guarantee you'll offend more than just the person you intended (and hilarity would ensue).

Going twice to Ursus for 90 dollars.  Last chance to nab TheWho's account...  Bidding closes at 5PM CET

[TheWho]

It's not politics as much as you might think, if you're as cynical as myself. I'm just trying to be fair here. I'm not defending Zen since he's my friend. I'm doing it because there is a lack of evidence against him. I'd do it for anybody. Due process is something I believe in.

ASA, In all fairness I have to say psy does what he believes is fair and is able to put aside all politics when making decisions for the forum and protecting free speech.  He unbanned me when he thought I was unfairly banned against huge pressure from the forum and fellow admins.  This didnt make him very popular for awhile and he knew that risk when he made the decision  (he later regretted that decision but I like to think he would have done it just the same over again).  For this I have a great deal of respect for him.

All of what Zen did during that argument was driven by a spat between Zen and myself.  Things were said and threats were made that we both probably wish we could take back and delete.  I don’t believe there was any intent to hurt or expose CCM.  He was just trying to piss me off (and I him) and CCM was brought up and got in the middle.  She was not the target, but yes things were said in the heat of the moment.  It has long passed and should be well forgotten.