Way more kids praise programs than attack them, why is that?

[Joel]

Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010

[Whooter]

Whooter (John Reuben),

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29967

I asked you in the above thread,  "Can you say, with one hundred percent certainty, your collaborative partners don't have a track record of abuse?"

Personally, I don't have a problem with your cause rather STICC's collaborative partners who have a track record of abuse.

Joel, I think many people here would concur that I don’t mind answering people’s questions and I don’t shy away from controversy.  If I were this person John Reuben I would happily answer your question.  But I really don’t have the information to respond to you.
I do agree with you and I dont have a problem with this mans cause either.  On the surface it looks genuine.



...

[Ursus]

All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true in itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

—Adolf Hitler ,

Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[/list]
http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt[/list]

[Whooter]

All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true in itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

—Adolf Hitler ,

Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[/list]
http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt[/list]

Wow, Ursus, thats a big round about way of saying you think I am this John Reuben guy too.  Although it does play into Gingers Goebbels comment with the Nazi party theme.   At one time I was thought to be woodbury for a few years, then an Aspen Director in Utah, then Peter H. in Virginia (Ed consultant), a partner for Hidden lake Academy (that was funny for awhile).. Deborah thought I was Rudy Bentz for aboput a year and then there were a few others and now John Reuben.  I am flattered that my knowledge of the industry has progressed to the point that I am now considered a philanthropist.

You have shown your allegiance to Ginger by your attempts in burying her words and helping to push them back a few pages.  If she were my friend I would be embarrassed for her too, would try to make others believe that her comments were out of character and do the same thing you are doing.  You are a good person, Ursus, but you dont need to defend her, she is a big girl.  I never said she was closed minded.  I just warned her that labeling people because of their point of view was dangerous and the best way to avoid being isolated is to open up to more than one point of view.

Just let the information flow freely, be honest and let people choose for themselves!



...

[Inculcated]

Just let the information flow freely, be honest and let people choose for themselves!...

Okay, let’s start by having you answer the following:
Which programs meet your standards of approval?
What are the criteria by which you judge a program?

I take the unpopular point of view in the argument sometimes to play "devils advocate". I see myself as adding balance to a very biased and one-sided forum.

Like a guy hovering over an incest survivors forum with an intent to iterate over and over again comments about Freud having abandoned Seduction Theory would be anymore warmly received by the participating survivors ?

I believe in looking at study results coming out of the industry where many here do not want to discuss facts and instead would rather put more energy into discrediting them then reading them and getting out what they can.

Which studies were those again? Does the “getting out  what they can” necessitate turning off critical thinking and not taking into account factors like how the study was run or who funded the study etc.?

I point out the successes that programs have produced and as a result am called a shill for the industry. I am received by being called a liar, troll, industry shill, EdCon, Aspen employee, John Reuben, Peter Forne, Alan Newman, Dirk Grey, Nazi……… But I am just a program parent.

You’re more than that. You’re a guy who has for years tenaciously clung to this survivor’s forum in the role of devil's advocate. So creepy.

People who are opened minded and dont mind a balanced and honest debate dont seem to have a problem with me.

Which brings us neatly back to:

Just let the information flow freely, be honest and let people choose for themselves!...

Okay, let’s start by having you answer the following:
Which programs meet your standards of approval?
What are the criteria by which you judge a program?

[Whooter]

Okay, let’s start by having you answer the following:
Which programs meet your standards of approval?
What are the criteria by which you judge a program?

No thanks, we tried this approach. Also, Look at how "Studies" are received here on the forum.

Like a guy hovering over an incest survivors forum with an intent to iterate over and over again comments about Freud having abandoned Seduction Theory would be anymore warmly received by the participating survivors ?

If the incest survivors where selling the idea that all parents have sex with their kids then yes I would hover and argue that point with incest survivors.

Which studies were those again? Does the “getting out what they can” necessitate turning off critical thinking and not taking into account factors like how the study was run or who funded the study etc.?

If you were new here I would re post them.  But we all know the studies are valid but rejected here on fornits because of the outcome, let’s not fool each other.  There are plenty of studies which show the effectiveness of various programs.  Even though some of the studies were conducted by research facilities people here rejected them because researchers within the firm had prior experience with the industry they were studying.  If you were going to fund a study of your business would you choose a research firm who had no experience with what you do or one that was familiar with your type of business?

I dont think you could find any research firm that doesnt employ people with experience in the area of the research they are conducting.  We all know this but I think it helps everyone here justify ignoring the facts and maintain a white knuckle grip on the idea that programs never help anybody.

You’re more than that. You’re a guy who has for years tenaciously clung to this survivor’s forum in the role of devil's advocate. So creepy.

Not as creepy as those who log in and say they are survivors day after day.

Okay, let’s start by having you answer the following:
Which programs meet your standards of approval?
What are the criteria by which you judge a program?

I think what may be helpful is to start rating the programs on a scale of 1 to 10 so that parents who read the forum can gain a better understanding of which programs to avoid and which programs have had very little complaints.  The survivors on this forum may be in a better position to compile this info and it would be more pro-active than just trying to convince people that teenagers don’t have any problems and turn a blind eye to the situation.



...

[Troll Control]

Don't forget who Whooter really is.  He clearly has a financial stake in the TTI and has admitted it many times over the years only to come back to deny it now.  His "I'm a just regular parent" meme is false and hackneyed.  Click on the links to Whooter's posts in the above-linked thread to see in his own words that he's part of the TTI and not just some "concerned parent."  That assertion is laughable.

[Joel]

Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010

[Whooter]

Whooter wrote:

I think what may be helpful is to start rating the programs on a scale of 1 to 10 so that parents who read the forum can gain a better understanding of which programs to avoid and which programs have had very little complaints. The survivors on this forum may be in a better position to compile this info and it would be more pro-active than just trying to convince people that teenagers don’t have any problems and turn a blind eye to the situation.

What criteria would you use to rate a program?

The rating system would have to evolve and include input from many survivors who have had experiences from many places.  I see maybe a rating system like an A thru Z system or the 1 thru 10 that I mentioned earlier.
It could start at:
 
A – No negative reports filed
B – Some Undocumented complaints
C – Numerous complaints filed, there have been lawsuits filed with no findings
D – Documented Reports of Abuse
F – Closed down/ under state investigation due to abuse.

I think this would be easier to understand, Maintain and expand upon versus a “star rating system”.  A star rating system implies (to me anyway) that they are all good programs ... just some are better than others.



...

[Joel]

Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010

[Whooter]

Whooter,

You are aware you left out other factors/criteria, yes? I am not sure they would make a difference. I worked for programs and can honestly say a rating system would be useless.

Joel, I just intended the post to be a first pass.  I believe much more can be added but I expect if survivors chimed in it would evolve into something meaningful.  The rating could help parents that check into fornits to get an idea of how bad the program they are considering really is.  If a parent were considering a place like Tranquility Bay they would see that maybe an Aspen Ranch type of place would be a better choice.  The way it is now all a parents hears here is all programs are the same, which is no help at all.  So they may make a bad choice.

For example, many families believe that kids should read books, entertain themselves with board games and avoid TV all together, because tv viewing, in general, isn’t good for child development.  But if they must watch it there is a rating system available to them that helps guide them to make the best possible choice, even though some people maintain that all tv is harmful the system would guide a parent away from an ”R” rated movie for a young child.  This way the child is poisoned with a little lower dose.

[Joel]

Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010

[Whooter]

If a parent were considering a place like Tranquility Bay they would see that maybe an Aspen Ranch type of place would be a better choice.

I assume you are aware abuse takes place at Aspen Ranch.  Would you send your child there or refer another child there?

Abuse happens everywhere, Joel.  Hospitals, churches, public schools, by drug dealers, by violent boyfriends, by public school teachers, by abusive parents, by underpaid staff, by overpaid staff,......  but some places are a higher risk than others.  This is where a rating system would help.  I dont think we would ever find a place that is truly 100% safe... but If I were going to place my child I would pick places like ASR, Aspen Ranch etc. and a few other over Tranquility Bay and Hyde (although Hyde just became accredited so they seem to have cleaned up and deserve a second look).



...

[Joel]

Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010

[Whooter]

Abuse happens everywhere, Joel. Hospitals, churches, public schools, by drug dealers, by violent boyfriends, by public school teachers, by abusive parents, by underpaid staff, by overpaid staff,...... but some places are a higher risk than others. This is where a rating system would help. I dont think we would ever find a place that is truly 100% safe... but If I were going to place my child I would pick places like ASR, Aspen Ranch etc. and a few other over Tranquility Bay and Hyde (although Hyde just became accredited so they seem to have cleaned up and deserve a second look).

Whooter,

Accreditation is a selling gimmick.  Programs receive extra funding upon accreditation.  It would be virtually impossible to construct a rating system to ensure the safety of children in programs.  I know from first hand experience because I worked for programs.  Having said that, it does not make me special.  The safety of children is at the top of the totem pole.  What boggles my mind is your choice of schools.  They have a reputation for abuse and are not safe.

The rating system would not be constructed to insure the safety of children, like you said this would be impossible.  Just like the rating system for the movie industry cannot insure that kids will not be scared or harmed.  But they at least do the best they can.  The rating system would help to guide parents to make a better decision.
If, through your experience, you feel Tranquility Bay is a safer and less abusive place for a child than ASR or Aspen Ranch then your information would be part of the equation which builds the rating system and this would be passed onto parents who visit Fornits.  This wouldn’t have any effect on the programs themselves at least this wouldn’t be the initial intent.



...