Has he considered emailing me? I don't see how emailing you would rectify anything. In fact, why would you start a thread instead of sending me a PM?
Hey, what happened to Bumpy? I got an e-mail from him telling me that he got the ax and has been cast into outer darkness of cyber purgatory! He is wanting to know why because there was no word from P-tuckett, but rather just a freeze up on his account here. Maybe youz guys can get his PM thing going?
And why are you making it a public thread instead of PMing me?
Umm, why shouldn't I? I wasn't asking specifically YOU why he got kicked off, I was asking those who had witnessed whatever "untoward behavior" in some particular thread he may have been involved in, including you as well as others. I was soliciting their/your OPINIONS on the matter. That's what drives this place right? People's opinions concerning their experiences when involved with The Way. Soliciting peoples' opinions concerning their many things we deal with here, there, and all over the place. And so, since when has "publicity" in the GreaseSpot Cafe been an issue? Why has the Grease Spot Cafe become a place of intense "moderation" which amounts to nothing more than severe CENSORSHIP? It used to be a place where one could speak one's mind without fear of being CONTROLLED by SOMEONE HIGHER UP, but nay, no more it seems! Ya know, I may have a some fond memories of times in The Way, BUT, I too did not like the SUPPRESSION of personal thoughts and beliefs, and it certainly seems as if things have come full circle here at the GSCafe.
Why make it a public thread? Because I wanted to. But that's against some new rule? Well now, I find this very enlightening. This place has changed Paw, and it seems to be very much more repressive than it ever was. If a person has a dissenting opinion that goes against the "mission" of the GSCafe, then it seems as if the "AXE" is looming which will then eventually fall. Now, I got the boot for a blatant violation for which I own up to. I called a fellow post a cuss word, which was plainly a breach in the rules here. I have since made up with that person, and have even had a nice and pleasant PM conversation with her. It has been nice. But it really does seem as if the censorship hammer has come down, and this place is not what it was when I came here back in 2002, or whenever it was...
Oh, and I responded publicly like this "because I wanted to....."
That's crap Jonny. Paw runs it on his own time and on his own dime. You are not paying for it. He is. If you don't like it you don't have to be here. Regardless of my opinions of your posts, the fact that you CAN post here is testimony to Paw's willingness to provide you the freedom to express your opinion AT NO EXPENSE TO YOURSELF. I don't really give a crap about Bumpy/Grumpy/Slumpy - nor do I care about a lot of other opinions posted on this site; however I am not going to go after the owner/moderator who gives free time/ free space to people until they rile the rest of the crowd. Why don't you host your own site - let's see how your rules unfold.
Umm, why shouldn't I? I wasn't asking specifically YOU why he got kicked off, I was asking those who had witnessed whatever "untoward behavior" in some particular thread he may have been involved in, including you as well as others. I was soliciting their/your OPINIONS on the matter. That's what drives this place right? People's opinions concerning their experiences when involved with The Way. Soliciting peoples' opinions concerning their many things we deal with here, there, and all over the place. And so, since when has "publicity" in the GreaseSpot Cafe been an issue? Why has the Grease Spot Cafe become a place of intense "moderation" which amounts to nothing more than severe CENSORSHIP? It used to be a place where one could speak one's mind without fear of being CONTROLLED by SOMEONE HIGHER UP, but nay, no more it seems! Ya know, I may have a some fond memories of times in The Way, BUT, I too did not like the SUPPRESSION of personal thoughts and beliefs, and it certainly seems as if things have come full circle here at the GSCafe.
Why make it a public thread? Because I wanted to. But that's against some new rule? Well now, I find this very enlightening. This place has changed Paw, and it seems to be very much more repressive than it ever was. If a person has a dissenting opinion that goes against the "mission" of the GSCafe, then it seems as if the "AXE" is looming which will then eventually fall. Now, I got the boot for a blatant violation for which I own up to. I called a fellow post a cuss word, which was plainly a breach in the rules here. I have since made up with that person, and have even had a nice and pleasant PM conversation with her. It has been nice. But it really does seem as if the censorship hammer has come down, and this place is not what it was when I came here back in 2002, or whenever it was...
Oh, and I responded publicly like this "because I wanted to....."
Well, in your post you said that Bumpy was wanting to know why. So I guess that's why pawtucket asked why he didn't email him.
Why is it that every time somebody get suspended or moderated there's a new thread talking about it?
Even though I'm no fan of censorship, I'm real tired of some of these boneheads who undermine what this site is about. Free speech is incidental, this site is about telling the other side of the story. So what do we get? People who work real hard at telling the story that we're trying to counter. TWI has their own web site, the offshoots have their own, and there are private web sites and home fellowships, all who tell the Wierwille/PFAL/TWI side of the story...and don't allow any dissent.
I'm freakin' tired of "free speech" being used as a pretext to undermine telling that story.
Why is Bumpy suspended? I have no idea, but I won't miss him. He contributed nothing to this site.
Well I have to admit Bumpy makes me laugh sometimes. I can appreciate him for that if nothing else. I've found that everyone here has something to contribute sometimes it just takes awhile to appreciate it .
Why even the so called Wierwille apologists have their merits........
Well,
Maybe some of the dweebs that frequent this place are obnoxious and contentious. But jeeze, wouldn't it get boring without 'em?
Honestly, if it wasn't for the Wierwille Apologists to fence with, I doubt I'd post much at all.
So, to all you Piffle regurgitators 'round here, Thanks for all your efforts!
No matter how low I may feel, or how bad things may go wrong in my life, I can always read some of your posts and realize that at least I'm not as screwed up as you are.
Jonny...I don't know about all that. I agree with Rumrunner...Paw runs this place on his own dime...and he OWNS it. This isn't a democracy! This is an anti twi website...period.
So many folks want to come here and romanticize about how "great" it was...PATOOIE!
Many of us, in spite of those who want to cling to their twi memories of good times and giggles, are trying to warn people about the dangers of a cult. I thought that when Richeson started his elite, waycorps, bless you, you're God's best, let's all bullsh *t each other, bogus, website...maybe some of the twi "lovers of the good things that this insideous cult did for my life" jagoffs...would congregate elsewhere.
...not trying to run anyone off...I'm just sayin'...
Why is Bumpy suspended? I have no idea, but I won't miss him. He contributed nothing to this site.
I SECOND that motion!
I thought that when Richeson started his elite, waycorps, bless you, you're God's best, let's all bullsh *t each other, bogus, website...maybe some of the twi "lovers of the good things that this insideous cult did for my life" jagoffs...would congregate elsewhere.
...not trying to run anyone off...I'm just sayin'...
Well, I guess a good way to call attention to one's self on a web site forum is to start some sh!t with the moderator...
...Paw runs this place on his own dime...and he OWNS it. This isn't a democracy! This is an anti twi website...period.
...not trying to run anyone off...I'm just sayin'...
So is that what Pawtucket says this place is?...an anti twi website?...If so, then all opinions are NOT welcome and discussions should NOT be encouraged...You can't have it both ways...If this is an anti twi site then members should be required upon joining to swear to uphold the tearing down of twi...I'd like to hear what Pawtucket has to say--Is this an ex-way site or is this an anti way site?...Unless you're his new spokesperson, Groucho...
If this website is only welcoming to those who wish to ascribe only the bad and evil of twi, without the challenges of opposing viewpoints, then this site loses a great deal of it's credibility...If that's what Pawtucket wants, that's certainly his privilege...In my observations, I have not noticed Pawtucket treating any of the "Wierwille worshippers", as you like to call them, any different than the rest of the members here...Pawtucket does a great job of letting the site run itself...It's the crazy-a$$ed greasespot 'mob' that scares the hell outa me....
Jonny...I don't know about all that. I agree with Rumrunner...Paw runs this place on his own dime...and he OWNS it. This isn't a democracy! This is an anti twi website...period.
So many folks want to come here and romanticize about how "great" it was...PATOOIE!
Many of us, in spite of those who want to cling to their twi memories of good times and giggles, are trying to warn people about the dangers of a cult. I thought that when Richeson started his elite, waycorps, bless you, you're God's best, let's all bullsh *t each other, bogus, website...maybe some of the twi "lovers of the good things that this insideous cult did for my life" jagoffs...would congregate elsewhere.
...not trying to run anyone off...I'm just sayin'...
One thing I know, before I go into hiding again, (I might know a few others), is that if I used that "jagoff" term to describe someone who is telling only about his/her bad experience, I'd be outta here faster than "a cow whizzin' on a flatrock". Now I would bet my cyber boots that Groucho didn't have me in mind when he made this statement, but does it matter? It seems to get to where anyone who mentions something good that they got from TWI, is uner a barbeque warning, and suddenly turns into someone who wants to do nothing but "romanticize about how 'great' it was". Someone who is not convinced of something but is willing to learn is suddenly denying it flat out. It gets to where even by mentioning something good I got out of TWI, I am denying someone else's hurt.
When I question something, it is just that, a question. A couple or so years ago, I questioned Groucho's documentation on a statement that VPW was fired from his denomination for sexual "indecretions". Groucho, despite his many strong statements about what he sees as the evils of TWI, had the integrity and honesty to admit he didn't know exactly where it came from, even though he remembered that there was something. For my part, I have never denied that it may have happened, neither here nor in my own mind.
I feel I got quite a few good things from TWI. yes, it is certainly possible to go on about the good so much that it seems nothing bad ever happened. Would I be doing this simply by mentioning, say, the benefits I feel I still get from corps fitness? Or a lamp purchase I made on the WOW field that turned out to be the perfect gift? It seems that way sometimes.
But I have mostly stayed away from mentioning anything too much, especially lately, whether it is about the good or the bad. Like how mad I get at a couple people who seem to accept that someone's sexual abuse storys is true but then, having presumably accepted it, go on to belittle the person's experience. As I said, I feel prettty sure that Groucho didn't have me in mind when he used that term, but I wonder with those all inclusive statements whether he might just as well have.
I don't even know what bumpy's position is exactly ... he doesn't seem to be a twi sympathizer at all ... and while he seemed to consistently suggest people move on after 20 years ... he contributed and was a noted voice/character, not that that has been a requirement here that I have noticed.
Most political sites allow dissenting opinions ... some get a little sassy. That is usually better, unless it gets out of hand. But it does seem open discussion is better ... a place with a free flow of opinion.
The attitude that TWI has their censored site so "we" have our censored site ... seems a little off ... this has been an open place, which is what is better about it. Both sides get presented. JAL's letter gets dissected, but it would be better if he and "his side" were involved in the point by point discussion.
Yes it is pawtucket's site ... I guess some contribute to it ... but the time involved is the big thing. Most sites want more traffic ... and the time everyone puts in makes it more valuable ...
GSC seems more of a place where ex TWI hang out ... and the exposure of TWI here means most have moved on. Hopefully this will remain a place where other opinion is welcome ... and not just from a select few "token" sympathizers.
All I can figure is several people complained that bumpy was "attacking" their views, or them personally for their seeming fixation on old TWI stuff.
Hopefully this remains an open forum, which is the contrast to the closed forum sites of TWI and some splinters, I guess. Actually though, the other sites don't have any discussion that I have seen ...
That corps site seems a place to remember each other and the activities and to NOT discuss the bad side, nor discuss how "righteous" TWI was ... making a "happier" environment to reunite with old pals. GSC is focused on the perils of TWI like cult thinking, and the manipulation and deceit.
But there seems room for a lot of other discussion around that, and I'd think all opinion within the rules would be allowed, so I don't know what happened to Bumpy ... and he doesn't seem to know either.
In my view, GSC is a bit like a triage area. People come here with a wide variety of injuries and treatment requirements. But, along come the doubters who seem insistent that all will be fine with an aspirin and a band-aid. Or worse, that the car wreck never really happened. Of course, there are some who will do just fine will minimal treatment but others require much more extensive help. You can't just hang around the triage room insisting that people reflect on the good time they had at the beach just before the awful car wreck and not expect to encounter some resistance. Talking (extensively or exclusively) about the good times at the beach is best left for a future date when the bandages have been removed and the pain has subsided.
First of all, I for one think it's a good thing that JL raised this in public. Seems to me that there's inherently plenty behind-the- scenes activity involved in running any discussion forum. So if someone has a question, why not ask it out in the open? I like things out in the open. It's certainly Pawtucket's prerogative to like for such matters to be handled privately, but that's just me.
As for Bumpy...Bumpy is a provocateur. That's not necessarily a bad thing. One can provoke new ways of thinking with humor and satire, which seems to be what Bumpy is about. I agree with Rhino on this point: Bumpy doesn't strike me in the least as a "twi sympathizer." So to say, as some have in this thread, that he deserves to get the boot becasue he's somehow interfering with telling the "other side of the story" is, to me, ridiculous. I know Bumpy can be hard to understand, but I think I "get him" enough to say he's not painting any kind of rosy picture of twi, past or present. What he's saying is basically, "OK, so live life now. Enjoy! Quit rehashing the same stuff over and over." (I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but that seems to be his recurring message.)
For those who have forgotten, on the home page of GS, under “Forums,” it says:
These forums are meant to be a place of discussion, where ideas and debates are encouraged. We welcome your opinion.
But Oakspear said (which, by the way shocked me, coming from him):
Free speech is incidental, this site is about telling the other side of the story.
If free speech were incidental, then wouldn’t that pretty much eliminate any debates? And what would there be to discuss in the “About the Way” forum? I can see it now:
Waysider, I agree. I've never been of the "just shut up and just get over it" camp. However, there is some wisdom in moving on eventually, wouldn't you say, for the sake of one's own peace of mind? Bumpy expressed that view in, shall we say, not the most diplomatic way, but not in a hateful, mean way, either.
I said years ago on the old GS site, or maybe on Waydale, that how long it takes for someone to get over past abuse or hurts is a very individual thing, and no one else can dictate it. I still stand by that. My role in life is not to judge others' journeys. But a little nudge in the direction of replacing all the anger and hurt with something that can bring some joy and happiness to life today isn't a bad thing, is it?
Waysider, I agree. I've never been of the "just shut up and just get over it" camp. However, there is some wisdom in moving on eventually, wouldn't you say, for the sake of one's own peace of mind? Bumpy expressed that view in, shall we say, not the most diplomatic way, but not in a hateful, mean way, either.
I said years ago on the old GS site, or maybe on Waydale, that how long it takes for someone to get over past abuse or hurts is a very individual thing, and no one else can dictate it. I still stand by that. My role in life is not to judge others' journeys. But a little nudge in the direction of replacing all the anger and hurt with something that can bring some joy and happiness to life today isn't a bad thing, is it?
As for Bumpy...Bumpy is a provocateur. That's not necessarily a bad thing. One can provoke new ways of thinking with humor and satire, which seems to be what Bumpy is about. I agree with Rhino on this point: Bumpy doesn't strike me in the least as a "twi sympathizer." So to say, as some have in this thread, that he deserves to get the boot becasue he's somehow interfering with telling the "other side of the story" is, to me, ridiculous. I know Bumpy can be hard to understand, but I think I "get him" enough to say he's not painting any kind of rosy picture of twi, past or present. What he's saying is basically, "OK, so live life now. Enjoy! Quit rehashing the same stuff over and over." (I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but that seems to be his recurring message.)
I think you're spot on here, Linda. I've seen other posters here at the Cafe be much more irritating that Bumpy with their provoking. I didn't enjoy Bump's posts - but I understood his point. They seemed very poorly timed to me. I didn't really care for his style.
I remember when Bumpy first hit GSC with his story of the murders in Norway. For some reason, he wasn't forthcoming with the details and he got a lot of flack. In turn, he got very irritated with folks for questioning him. It took a long time (too long IMHO) to get to the point of his posts on that subject. (My memory on that subject is more of an impression - I haven't gone back and looked at those posts.)
Recently, I got very uncomfortable with some of Bumpy's posts that referred to me in the forums. I told him so in a PM and asked him to stop. He apologized and agreed, but was a little too eager to get a bit more personal for my tastes. It wasn't over the top, and may have been an innocent invitation to get to know him better but it was more than I was comfortable with. I didn't report it because I felt it was something I could handle by simply declining the invitation. (Which I did.) The issue ended there.
I know that at least one other poster was uncomfortable with Bump's PMs invitations. I don't want to paint the wrong picture here - I don't think he was "trolling for babes," but I do think he pushed the envelope on comfort zones.
First of all, I for one think it's a good thing that JL raised this in public. Seems to me that there's inherently plenty behind-the- scenes activity involved in running any discussion forum. So if someone has a question, why not ask it out in the open? I like things out in the open. It's certainly Pawtucket's prerogative to like for such matters to be handled privately, but that's just me.
Linda, are you asking me to publicly state what someone did to get suspended? I will not publicly embarrass someone like that. And that is where Lingo was headed in my opinion. I wouldn't do it to Jonny when he got suspended. I sent an email to Bumpy which he could have responded to, but hasn't. In public, a simple question gets blown out of proportion. And suddenly, with this thread, I have volumes to answer based on assumptions. Nothing has changed philosophically with GS, but someone like Bumpy is putting those thoughts in threads and people start believing them. I'll do another post to cover that.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
15
8
11
20
Popular Days
Jul 6
38
Jul 4
31
Jul 7
29
Jul 9
19
Top Posters In This Topic
pawtucket 15 posts
WordWolf 8 posts
J0nny Ling0 11 posts
rhino 20 posts
Popular Days
Jul 6 2008
38 posts
Jul 4 2008
31 posts
Jul 7 2008
29 posts
Jul 9 2008
19 posts
waysider
Well, I know he had to decide whether to be Bumpy or Grumpy.
(Sorta reminds me of the old Firesign Theatre bit--"How can you be in two places at once when you're not anywhere at all?")
Anyway, I'm thinking maybe something got inadvertently messed up in the process?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawtucket
Has he considered emailing me? I don't see how emailing you would rectify anything. In fact, why would you start a thread instead of sending me a PM?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
I thought this thread was going to be along the lines of
Where in the World is Carmen SanDiego?
Where's Bumpy?
Senegal? France? Idaho? Germany?
It would make a good board game.
Wherever he is I know the wine is flowing and the food is good
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Why assume that his e-mailing me was his attempt to rectify anything? He is a friend and simply told me what had happened and now wonders why.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawtucket
And why are you making it a public thread instead of PMing me?
Bumpy has emailed me numerous times, he knows my email address.
Edited by pawtucketLink to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Umm, why shouldn't I? I wasn't asking specifically YOU why he got kicked off, I was asking those who had witnessed whatever "untoward behavior" in some particular thread he may have been involved in, including you as well as others. I was soliciting their/your OPINIONS on the matter. That's what drives this place right? People's opinions concerning their experiences when involved with The Way. Soliciting peoples' opinions concerning their many things we deal with here, there, and all over the place. And so, since when has "publicity" in the GreaseSpot Cafe been an issue? Why has the Grease Spot Cafe become a place of intense "moderation" which amounts to nothing more than severe CENSORSHIP? It used to be a place where one could speak one's mind without fear of being CONTROLLED by SOMEONE HIGHER UP, but nay, no more it seems! Ya know, I may have a some fond memories of times in The Way, BUT, I too did not like the SUPPRESSION of personal thoughts and beliefs, and it certainly seems as if things have come full circle here at the GSCafe.
Why make it a public thread? Because I wanted to. But that's against some new rule? Well now, I find this very enlightening. This place has changed Paw, and it seems to be very much more repressive than it ever was. If a person has a dissenting opinion that goes against the "mission" of the GSCafe, then it seems as if the "AXE" is looming which will then eventually fall. Now, I got the boot for a blatant violation for which I own up to. I called a fellow post a cuss word, which was plainly a breach in the rules here. I have since made up with that person, and have even had a nice and pleasant PM conversation with her. It has been nice. But it really does seem as if the censorship hammer has come down, and this place is not what it was when I came here back in 2002, or whenever it was...
Oh, and I responded publicly like this "because I wanted to....."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
That's crap Jonny. Paw runs it on his own time and on his own dime. You are not paying for it. He is. If you don't like it you don't have to be here. Regardless of my opinions of your posts, the fact that you CAN post here is testimony to Paw's willingness to provide you the freedom to express your opinion AT NO EXPENSE TO YOURSELF. I don't really give a crap about Bumpy/Grumpy/Slumpy - nor do I care about a lot of other opinions posted on this site; however I am not going to go after the owner/moderator who gives free time/ free space to people until they rile the rest of the crowd. Why don't you host your own site - let's see how your rules unfold.
Edited by RumRunnerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Well, in your post you said that Bumpy was wanting to know why. So I guess that's why pawtucket asked why he didn't email him.
Why is it that every time somebody get suspended or moderated there's a new thread talking about it?
Even though I'm no fan of censorship, I'm real tired of some of these boneheads who undermine what this site is about. Free speech is incidental, this site is about telling the other side of the story. So what do we get? People who work real hard at telling the story that we're trying to counter. TWI has their own web site, the offshoots have their own, and there are private web sites and home fellowships, all who tell the Wierwille/PFAL/TWI side of the story...and don't allow any dissent.
I'm freakin' tired of "free speech" being used as a pretext to undermine telling that story.
Why is Bumpy suspended? I have no idea, but I won't miss him. He contributed nothing to this site.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Well I have to admit Bumpy makes me laugh sometimes. I can appreciate him for that if nothing else. I've found that everyone here has something to contribute sometimes it just takes awhile to appreciate it .
Why even the so called Wierwille apologists have their merits........
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
I didn't "go after the moderator", I answered his questions with my opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Jonny...I don't know about all that. I agree with Rumrunner...Paw runs this place on his own dime...and he OWNS it. This isn't a democracy! This is an anti twi website...period.
So many folks want to come here and romanticize about how "great" it was...PATOOIE!
Many of us, in spite of those who want to cling to their twi memories of good times and giggles, are trying to warn people about the dangers of a cult. I thought that when Richeson started his elite, waycorps, bless you, you're God's best, let's all bullsh *t each other, bogus, website...maybe some of the twi "lovers of the good things that this insideous cult did for my life" jagoffs...would congregate elsewhere.
...not trying to run anyone off...I'm just sayin'...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I SECOND that motion!
Hmmm... boy are YOU confused!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
simonzelotes
Well, I guess a good way to call attention to one's self on a web site forum is to start some sh!t with the moderator...
So is that what Pawtucket says this place is?...an anti twi website?...If so, then all opinions are NOT welcome and discussions should NOT be encouraged...You can't have it both ways...If this is an anti twi site then members should be required upon joining to swear to uphold the tearing down of twi...I'd like to hear what Pawtucket has to say--Is this an ex-way site or is this an anti way site?...Unless you're his new spokesperson, Groucho...
If this website is only welcoming to those who wish to ascribe only the bad and evil of twi, without the challenges of opposing viewpoints, then this site loses a great deal of it's credibility...If that's what Pawtucket wants, that's certainly his privilege...In my observations, I have not noticed Pawtucket treating any of the "Wierwille worshippers", as you like to call them, any different than the rest of the members here...Pawtucket does a great job of letting the site run itself...It's the crazy-a$$ed greasespot 'mob' that scares the hell outa me....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Nicely put Simonzelotes...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
One thing I know, before I go into hiding again, (I might know a few others), is that if I used that "jagoff" term to describe someone who is telling only about his/her bad experience, I'd be outta here faster than "a cow whizzin' on a flatrock". Now I would bet my cyber boots that Groucho didn't have me in mind when he made this statement, but does it matter? It seems to get to where anyone who mentions something good that they got from TWI, is uner a barbeque warning, and suddenly turns into someone who wants to do nothing but "romanticize about how 'great' it was". Someone who is not convinced of something but is willing to learn is suddenly denying it flat out. It gets to where even by mentioning something good I got out of TWI, I am denying someone else's hurt.
When I question something, it is just that, a question. A couple or so years ago, I questioned Groucho's documentation on a statement that VPW was fired from his denomination for sexual "indecretions". Groucho, despite his many strong statements about what he sees as the evils of TWI, had the integrity and honesty to admit he didn't know exactly where it came from, even though he remembered that there was something. For my part, I have never denied that it may have happened, neither here nor in my own mind.
I feel I got quite a few good things from TWI. yes, it is certainly possible to go on about the good so much that it seems nothing bad ever happened. Would I be doing this simply by mentioning, say, the benefits I feel I still get from corps fitness? Or a lamp purchase I made on the WOW field that turned out to be the perfect gift? It seems that way sometimes.
But I have mostly stayed away from mentioning anything too much, especially lately, whether it is about the good or the bad. Like how mad I get at a couple people who seem to accept that someone's sexual abuse storys is true but then, having presumably accepted it, go on to belittle the person's experience. As I said, I feel prettty sure that Groucho didn't have me in mind when he used that term, but I wonder with those all inclusive statements whether he might just as well have.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I don't even know what bumpy's position is exactly ... he doesn't seem to be a twi sympathizer at all ... and while he seemed to consistently suggest people move on after 20 years ... he contributed and was a noted voice/character, not that that has been a requirement here that I have noticed.
Most political sites allow dissenting opinions ... some get a little sassy. That is usually better, unless it gets out of hand. But it does seem open discussion is better ... a place with a free flow of opinion.
The attitude that TWI has their censored site so "we" have our censored site ... seems a little off ... this has been an open place, which is what is better about it. Both sides get presented. JAL's letter gets dissected, but it would be better if he and "his side" were involved in the point by point discussion.
Yes it is pawtucket's site ... I guess some contribute to it ... but the time involved is the big thing. Most sites want more traffic ... and the time everyone puts in makes it more valuable ...
GSC seems more of a place where ex TWI hang out ... and the exposure of TWI here means most have moved on. Hopefully this will remain a place where other opinion is welcome ... and not just from a select few "token" sympathizers.
All I can figure is several people complained that bumpy was "attacking" their views, or them personally for their seeming fixation on old TWI stuff.
Hopefully this remains an open forum, which is the contrast to the closed forum sites of TWI and some splinters, I guess. Actually though, the other sites don't have any discussion that I have seen ...
That corps site seems a place to remember each other and the activities and to NOT discuss the bad side, nor discuss how "righteous" TWI was ... making a "happier" environment to reunite with old pals. GSC is focused on the perils of TWI like cult thinking, and the manipulation and deceit.
But there seems room for a lot of other discussion around that, and I'd think all opinion within the rules would be allowed, so I don't know what happened to Bumpy ... and he doesn't seem to know either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
In my view, GSC is a bit like a triage area. People come here with a wide variety of injuries and treatment requirements. But, along come the doubters who seem insistent that all will be fine with an aspirin and a band-aid. Or worse, that the car wreck never really happened. Of course, there are some who will do just fine will minimal treatment but others require much more extensive help. You can't just hang around the triage room insisting that people reflect on the good time they had at the beach just before the awful car wreck and not expect to encounter some resistance. Talking (extensively or exclusively) about the good times at the beach is best left for a future date when the bandages have been removed and the pain has subsided.
Just my opinion
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
Hear, hear, SimonZee. And good points, Lifted Up.
First of all, I for one think it's a good thing that JL raised this in public. Seems to me that there's inherently plenty behind-the- scenes activity involved in running any discussion forum. So if someone has a question, why not ask it out in the open? I like things out in the open. It's certainly Pawtucket's prerogative to like for such matters to be handled privately, but that's just me.
As for Bumpy...Bumpy is a provocateur. That's not necessarily a bad thing. One can provoke new ways of thinking with humor and satire, which seems to be what Bumpy is about. I agree with Rhino on this point: Bumpy doesn't strike me in the least as a "twi sympathizer." So to say, as some have in this thread, that he deserves to get the boot becasue he's somehow interfering with telling the "other side of the story" is, to me, ridiculous. I know Bumpy can be hard to understand, but I think I "get him" enough to say he's not painting any kind of rosy picture of twi, past or present. What he's saying is basically, "OK, so live life now. Enjoy! Quit rehashing the same stuff over and over." (I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but that seems to be his recurring message.)
For those who have forgotten, on the home page of GS, under “Forums,” it says:
But Oakspear said (which, by the way shocked me, coming from him):
If free speech were incidental, then wouldn’t that pretty much eliminate any debates? And what would there be to discuss in the “About the Way” forum? I can see it now:
Poster 1: TWI really sucks.
Poster 2: Yes, it does. It was all bad.
Poster 3: Boy, you two are so right. Great posts!
Poster 4: TWI was soooooooo bad....
Posters 1-3: How bad was it?
Poster 4: It was so bad that I left.
Poster 1-3, in unison: Yeah! Me too!
Poster 1: (thinking)
Poster 2: (pondering)
Poster 3: (snoring a little)
Poster 4: Anyone wanna go shoot some hoops?
Edited by Linda ZLink to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
Waysider, I agree. I've never been of the "just shut up and just get over it" camp. However, there is some wisdom in moving on eventually, wouldn't you say, for the sake of one's own peace of mind? Bumpy expressed that view in, shall we say, not the most diplomatic way, but not in a hateful, mean way, either.
I said years ago on the old GS site, or maybe on Waydale, that how long it takes for someone to get over past abuse or hurts is a very individual thing, and no one else can dictate it. I still stand by that. My role in life is not to judge others' journeys. But a little nudge in the direction of replacing all the anger and hurt with something that can bring some joy and happiness to life today isn't a bad thing, is it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Well said, LZ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Nice analogy, the triage room. Waysider.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
I think you're spot on here, Linda. I've seen other posters here at the Cafe be much more irritating that Bumpy with their provoking. I didn't enjoy Bump's posts - but I understood his point. They seemed very poorly timed to me. I didn't really care for his style.
I remember when Bumpy first hit GSC with his story of the murders in Norway. For some reason, he wasn't forthcoming with the details and he got a lot of flack. In turn, he got very irritated with folks for questioning him. It took a long time (too long IMHO) to get to the point of his posts on that subject. (My memory on that subject is more of an impression - I haven't gone back and looked at those posts.)
Recently, I got very uncomfortable with some of Bumpy's posts that referred to me in the forums. I told him so in a PM and asked him to stop. He apologized and agreed, but was a little too eager to get a bit more personal for my tastes. It wasn't over the top, and may have been an innocent invitation to get to know him better but it was more than I was comfortable with. I didn't report it because I felt it was something I could handle by simply declining the invitation. (Which I did.) The issue ended there.
I know that at least one other poster was uncomfortable with Bump's PMs invitations. I don't want to paint the wrong picture here - I don't think he was "trolling for babes," but I do think he pushed the envelope on comfort zones.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
pawtucket
Linda, are you asking me to publicly state what someone did to get suspended? I will not publicly embarrass someone like that. And that is where Lingo was headed in my opinion. I wouldn't do it to Jonny when he got suspended. I sent an email to Bumpy which he could have responded to, but hasn't. In public, a simple question gets blown out of proportion. And suddenly, with this thread, I have volumes to answer based on assumptions. Nothing has changed philosophically with GS, but someone like Bumpy is putting those thoughts in threads and people start believing them. I'll do another post to cover that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites