Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > The Troubled Teen Industry
So say I
Antigen:
Oh, dear GOD!
No, I'm in bed with Sue Scheff. Can't you read? I called her, you know. In fact, I've called her several times! And she's called me too! So I guess she's in bed with me. We're all in bed together pursuing some diabolically twisted secret agenda. Now you know. So glad to have that off my chest. Come on, ladies, let's get back in bed.
Oh, and btw, I've had long chats with Shelby and Bill, Marti and Sammy, Mike and Rhonda, Morli, Leigh and even the evil legalizer, Arnold Trebach! And, of course, Wes, Ken and a long list of other people. We're all in a conspiracy to.... I can't say :rofl: But, since we're all more-or-less friends, and we all talk and don't exactly hate eachother, then we must all be up to something big and evil and no good at all, right?
Oh yeah, and Alex. How could I forget Alex! Though we've never talked on the phone, we don't hate eachother. So now Alex is a party to this conspiracy too.
Isn't this fun everybody? Mwoohahahaha! :roll:
If we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion by education
--Thomas Jefferson
--- End quote ---
_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
American drug war P.O.W.
10/80 - 10/82
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
Anonymity Anonymous
scottT:
"I suppose if you're working from a socialist paradigm it does. But I do things for money all the time. My mortgage holder, the grocery store owner, the gas company and others require it of me. And, frankly, given a choice between cash and faux martyrdome, I'll take the cash every time. "
Dear Ginger:
The current discussion reminds me of an anecdote about the time George Bernard Shaw attended a formal dinner party and happened to ask a certain lady at the table if she would sleep with him for $100,000. When she said that she would, Shaw then asked her if she would sleep with him for $10. Indignantly, she replied "Certainly Not! What do you think I am?" Shaw answered:" Madam, I think we've established WHAT you are. All that remains is to negotiate the PRICE."
I am quite surprised that you now seem to consider the "renting" of a hard drive for $12,500 to be a morally neutral sort of commercial transaction. I seem to recall a few months ago when WWASP had one of their law firms send you a cease and desist letter to stop people on this this board from saying mean (albeit truthful) things about the Academy at Ivy Ridge, and you told them where to stick it. Obviously, of all the oh-so-many rewards of running this site, cash is NOT one of them. Nonetheless, you were willing to risk faux martyrdom. God I hope that the last few days haven't been so discouraging that you are considering putting your archives up on EBay for the BMS's and EdCon's to salivate over!!
One of the earlier Anon posters provided a link to Colorado State's list of various forms of fallacious arguments. Having read it with considerable interest, I surmise that "choice between cash or faux martyrdom" falls into the category of the "fallacy of the excluded middle"
To justify a particular act by saying that one's ONLY choices are making money or being a martyr (whether of the righteous or the faux variety) ignores the obvious fact that humans possess free will -- They can choose to make money without sacrificing principles AND MOREOVER, acting contrary to ethical principles is under compulsion is vastly more excusable than running to do evil for personal profit.
Now what ethical principle is violated by "renting" one's computer hard drive for $12,500? Let me cite one very basic formulation of the Golden Rule:"That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor." (R. Hillel, circa 100 AD)
Was this transaction hateful? Sure seems so. Even your post concedes that people other than PURE will or may be adversely affected by the content of the hard drive ("Too bad they didn't understand the risk") . Even if similar information was available from alternate sources, clearly WWASP thought it was economically beneficial to their operations to obtain it from Ms. Bock at the agreed price.
From the standpoint of evidence law, in order to even hope to get the court or jury to consider a given communication, a litigant has to be able to show some sort of "chain of custody" of the writing. In other words, WWASP would presumably need some human being to verify that, indeed, all the emails on the hard drive were exactly as received from the named authors.
Of course, with mere computer files, the opportunity for addition, alteration, enhancement or other "sexing up" of the content is an extraordinary problem . (Compare the ordinary computer file with, say, a written document, the veracity of which could be authenticated by a handwriting expert). Adding a financial incentive obviously gives the owner of a computer hard drive a certain motivation to, shall we say, give the customer what they want.
PURE already is in a lawsuit. Having other individuals threatened with getting sucked into frivolous -- but too expensive to defend -- lawsuits is harmful in itself. I have seen nothing on this site in the last 7 months which gives me any comfort that WWASPS disposition to employ intimidation and bullying tactics is limited to their treatment of the inmates.
Cayo Hueso:
--- Quote ---On 2003-12-15 18:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"So you're in bed with Carey Ginger. That's OK. You know you sound more and more like a victim then a survivor?"
--- End quote ---
Come on now....this has gotten out of hand. Countless times I've read thru some of these posts and seen Ginger say that she thinks that Carey made a mistake but because she didn't feel that Carey had evil motives that means she's "in bed" with her. Agree to disagree and move on. It seems that even Frod and I moved on from the other war, Frod and Ginger can come to common ground on this without agreeing on every point.
I was away from these sites for a while and now that I've come back it seems that survivors have split off into different camps. It's really sad to see. There are an awful lot of us out there, all of us dealing with this stuff in varying degrees and stages and in different ways. Any time you get any group of people together there are going to be disagreements, but 99.999999999% of us agree that "the programs" were/are fucked up places that did incalculable damage to who knows how many kids. THAT seems to me to be the real issue.
Hope I don't get blasted for "defending" Ginger, which I was neither doing nor did there seem to be a need to, she holds pretty well on her own. Just commentary on what I've seen since I've been back.
--quote
--- End quote ---
Froderik:
:nworthy:
Cayo Hueso:
--- Quote ---On 2003-12-15 19:49:00, cayohueso wrote:
"
--- Quote ---
On 2003-12-15 18:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"So you're in bed with Carey Ginger. That's OK. You know you sound more and more like a victim then a survivor?"
--- End quote ---
Come on now....this has gotten out of hand. Countless times I've read thru some of these posts and seen Ginger say that she thinks that Carey made a mistake but because she didn't feel that Carey had evil motives that means she's "in bed" with her. .
--quote
--- End quote ---
"
--- End quote ---
woops...that was supposed to end with a question mark...
Countless times I've read thru some of these posts and seen Ginger say that she thinks that Carey made a mistake but because she didn't feel that Carey had evil motives that means she's "in bed" with her???? :roll:
The weavers of linen and hempen cloth, ... may exercise their trades without paying any fine.
-- Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations (chapter X, part II) notes:
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version