Rocky

Am I being too pessimistic? What's that song from Peter Pan? "I won't..."

The answer is NO. It's a great idea. It's a lofty ideal. It's NOT possible.

I disagree with YOU on this point. Challenging the person giving first person testimony is MOST inappropriate, unless YOU HAVE PROOF the person was lying. OM, your post above sugar coats your "responses" to people who, as young women especially, suffered abuse from wierwille. It is NOT simply exercising one's options for you to suggest the person that had been abused is responsible for that abuse. YOU sir, are a culprit in this situation. And YOU sir, most definitely need to exercise significantly more discretion and respect to the LIVE people who come here and tell their own stories. And frankly, I have to figure that if you weren't attacking these women, this fuss Groucho raised might not have come up in the first place (my opinion, absolutely). Abi's got a valid point, ya know Groucho... As wonderful (and lofty) and idea (and ideal) that is... to answer your question succinctly: NO!

I can imagine... at least it was a good game, from your team's perspective, eh? I live in the land of 110+ weather, and I would NOT want to sit through a game like you did today, outside. I live about two miles from Sun Devil Stadium... where the football Cardinals played for nearly 20 years. I went to one pre-season Cards game there a couple of years ago... at night... and was incredibly uncomfortable. At least for the Dbacks home games, they have air conditioning!!! (even if they don't have any offense!!!!!!!!)

Does this mean that you are an unapologetic wierwille apologist? Again, I don't think anyone here is trying to insist you agree with them. The concerns have to do with attacks by any of the so-called wierwille apologists on those who post their own testimony to the conduct of this man many have come to believe was a charlatan. If YOU do not participate in those attacks, then there's no problem with you (except for from groucho, I suppose... but he's got his own issues with attacking people).

That is an insightful essay. Indeed, the insistance that we were right and everyone else wrong fits with Knapp's hypothesis on secondary narcissism.

Absolutely (on the highlighted sentence)... if I were supporting him with my donations, I'd feel that way too...

Oeno... you still should be able to put a poll in... when you get into this thread, it should ask you if you want to manage the poll for this topic...

I have no problem with any of what your post says. I just don't see why anyone would believe JAL is obligated to come here and answer dwbh's concerns, comments or complaints.

There certainly is value in reflection/introspection. Therapists can certainly provide some direction in doing so. I've benefitted a couple of times from such. A great deal of healing/growth CAN come from self directed introspection and other learning... if one is actively looking for same. I would agree with you to a degree. I believe everyone can potentially benefit from therapy.

Point well made.

me too!

That's an excellent point. But Abigail's point is a good one too. I personally think Groucho's suggestion would amount to overreacting. I don't know if it's possible, but might it not be a bad idea to figure out if there's a way to establish "rules" or guidelines that better encourage (euphamistically speaking) such enhanced sensitivity for the feelings of others regarding the posting of first hand accounts of abuse by twi?

And while we're at it, let's not leave out the BUMPY/GRUMPY "apologists!" (j/k) ;)

Yeah... that's the ticket!

That OM had posted the comment was almost incidental. It didn't matter who said it. The point -- that people don't particularly care for being harassed -- is what was SPOT ON. I added the question of whether any of those people have any obligation to anyone here to come and tell their side of things... I don't see the obligation they (i.e. JAL) have to come here and be harassed. Now, IF such people were to come here and tell their side, by all means, they'd be open to criticism, probably a good bit of which would be reasonable criticism. And I don't think tongue man was at all "spot on" on this point. I think he (dwbh) has valid criticisms of those organizations he's been involved in. But I don't see anyone having any obligation to come here just because of dwbh's criticisms.

LOL indeed. You're probably right on that point. However, when I saw that you had posted a reply, I could only smack my forehead and say (to myself) "it figures!"

Yikes! That's troubling.

Space.com -- for better or worse, it's inevitable... Well, they (NASA maybe, ESA (European Space Agency), etc) will eventually be sending humans to MARS... Indeed, the article suggests it's possible (likely?) that humans have already had sex in space... Intriguing concept?

Done. And I see that Mr. Knapp has posted to this thread... :) That's correct. And, he has replied to you, I suppose you already know now. And yes, Kelly did most of the TWI stuff at trancenet.

Perhaps he leaves out TWI, or "fundamentalist christian cult" because he was NOT in TWI. I knew that the guy who started trancenet/trancechat wasn't a TWI guy. Another gal from twi (non-corps) picked up the ball and ran with it for a while... That gal's from your neck of the woods, LZ...

Hopefully not in here! :blink:

I hope nobody's going to get in trouble for commenting while on the boss's dime! :) (I'm not accusing anyone... just wondering out loud, rhetorically that is)

Exactly!

Proof? Who said it was "proof" of anything. It looked more like support for an inference. As such, it was as good as anything YOU contribute. "Pushed him toward trollishness?" "Evil?" I don't think anyone called him evil. I did see plenty of narrative indicating people had read his posts and surmised that he is a pain in the ar$e. By suggesting "maybe pushed him toward trollishness" are you saying he is not responsible for his conduct as a troll? Good grief. Can you say "curmudgeon"? Perhaps this MIRROR will help, rhino.