The Who offers to auction off his account for fornits!

[TheWho]

So if a kid is in a program, RTC or jail for torturing the family pet, killing the family dog, abusing others then by your standard it is okay to laugh if this kid gets tortured or dies…. Its normal and justified to laugh at someone who is dying is what you are saying (depending on the persons point of view).  Others may not see it as funny but that is okay.

Just want to understand the rules a little better.



...

I would have no problem with the family dog laughing at the kid in the program.

Ha,Ha,Ha,  I hear ya.  A little absurd isnt it?

[Anonymous]

The only thing which is absurd is you, for finding the topic of child abuse funny. I have links to other child abuse and sexual abuse forums which might interest you... you know since fornits is slow these days, I don't want you to get bored.

[Anonymous]

Ha,Ha,Ha, I know all of them well.. thanks anyways.

[Anonymous]

Funny, in a curious way, how laughing at a person who is dying of a heart attack is some how acceptable but laughing at a kid who is telling a story is so detestable.  This couldn’t possibly be because of a double standard could it?  No , I am sure people here on fornits treat all people equally.
 


...

And many of the kids that WHO referred to abusive programs will probably laugh when they hear about him contracting AIDS from one of his many program buddies.

Time to laugh some more about Miller Newton's heart attack (didn't see that one coming......sorta like WHOTIE's syphyllitic brain lesions)

Fuck you very much,

Laughin' @ Miller Newton

[Anonymous]

I have links to other child abuse and sexual abuse forums which might interest you... you know since fornits is slow these days, I don't want you to get bored.

Ha,Ha,Ha, I know all of them well.. thanks anyways.

I have no doubt that you do.

[Froderik]

Anyone who would have a problem with survivors expressing their sorrow in hearing that Miller Newton survived his heart attack either knows nothing about the industry, or is a believer in it; it has to be one of the two.

Let's Party On Miller Newton's Grave!

[Froderik]

If admins just deleted his posts at random, even once a day, he'd eventually see the futility in his efforts here and give up.

If programs can censor and control, so can Fornits. Don't try it with that same ol' bullshit about taking the 'high road' or whatever. That shit only goes so far in the real world. Just shut the fuck up and delete his posts. It's called guerilla warfare, you cunts. It worked in the Revolutionary War and it can fucking well work here! Every time you see one of his asinine posts and you feel like it, delete it. Simple, problem solved. Shut him down for good and let's move on to more interesting topics -- or, are you windbags here so fucking shallow and desperate for material that you need this duplicitous program schmuck to spur 'conversation' day in, day out?'

[TheWho]

If admins just deleted his posts at random, even once a day, he'd eventually see the futility in his efforts here and give up.

If programs can censor and control, so can Fornits. Don't try it with that same ol' bullshit about taking the 'high road' or whatever. That shit only goes so far in the real world. Just shut the fuck up and delete his posts. It's called guerilla warfare, you cunts. It worked in the Revolutionary War and it can fucking well work here! Every time you see one of his asinine posts and you feel like it, delete it. Simple, problem solved. Shut him down for good and let's move on to more interesting topics -- or, are you windbags here so fucking shallow and desperate for material that you need this duplicitous program schmuck to spur 'conversation' day in, day out?'

So you believe there are special cases where censorship and control over other peoples communication is warranted.  
Interesting, who gets to decide?



...

[Froderik]

who gets to decide?

The admins of fornits.

(You needn't worry though; I doubt they have the 'nads to do it.)

[TheWho]

Anyone who would have a problem with survivors expressing their sorrow in hearing that Miller Newton survived his heart attack either knows nothing about the industry, or is a believer in it; it has to be one of the two.

How about a staff member who knows the true extent of what a kid did to his family and younger sister and suffering he caused, which lead to his RTC stay.  Can staff express elation or find personal enjoyment over the suffering of this kid or would that be considered inhumane by some people here?

Is this a double standard? Or just two different points of view?



...

[TheWho]

who gets to decide?

The admins of fornits.

(You needn't worry though -- i doubt they have the 'nads to do it.)

So why do people belly ache here when programs decide to sensor or control communication with the kids?.  Why is it not okay for them to decide?  I am sure they would have the same consideration you do.



...

[Froderik]

How about a staff member who knows the true extent of what a kid did to his family and younger sister and suffering he caused, which [led] to his RTC stay.  Can staff express elation or find personal enjoyment over the suffering of this kid or would that be considered inhumane by some people here?

Depends; if a kid did some really evil shit to his parents (most that end up in RTCs probably don't do much in the way of 'deserving it' at all, of course) then in that case I would have to say yes, Who, let the fucker get some comeuppance for it.

But that's usually not the case, is it?

[Froderik]

So why do people belly ache here when programs decide to sensor or control communication with the kids?.  Why is it not okay for them to decide?  I am sure they would have the same consideration you do.

Stupid question.

"I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to."

-J.R. Bob Dobbs

[TheWho]

So why do people belly ache here when programs decide to sensor or control communication with the kids?.  Why is it not okay for them to decide?  I am sure they would have the same consideration you do.

Stupid question.

"I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to."

-J.R. Bob Dobbs

Well, I am glad we cleared that up.  So you believe there are times when communication needs to be controlled and censored.  If we remove the double standard then this would be acceptable everywhere like in programs if the staff felt it was appropriate.  Maybe vote on it on a case by case basis depending on how bad the kid speaks out or what he is liable to say.
Intermittent free speech... I like that one!


...

[Deprogrammed]

How about a staff member who knows the true extent of what a kid did to his family and younger sister and suffering he caused, which [led] to his RTC stay.  Can staff express elation or find personal enjoyment over the suffering of this kid or would that be considered inhumane by some people here?

Depends; if a kid did some really evil shit to his parents (most that end up in RTCs probably don't do much in the way of 'deserving it' at all, of course) then in that case I would have to say yes, Who, let the fucker get some comeuppance for it.

But that's usually not the case, is it?

WHO,
Regardless of WHAT the kid(s) have done.....program staff must maintain their professional bearing(s) at all times. This is the reason why they are called and supposed to be "PROFESSIONALS". The sad thing is this, MR. WHO; in a great many of the "PROGRAMS" across the UNITED STATES there are some who are "COUNSELING" children that do not have degrees or any formal training, and then there are many that also do have formal training and degrees....The ones that are not formally trained more than likely are not professionals, and the ones that do have the training/degree do not always act like professionals like they are supposed to be. Integrity, know- how, personal morals, among a few other things is what makes one a professional.

P.S. Miller Newton is and was NEVER a professional, I assure you. He never was in any, way ,shape or form
-DP