oldiesman

Jeff, but you still spinned and your first statement was inaccurate. How can you demand truth without being truthful yourself? Regarding spin in the forums, I don't think it can be helped. Each person has their own perspective on things, and both pro-Wierwille/twi and anti-Wierwille/twi spin is allowed on the forums. I think most folks will agree on this point, I suppose. When I misquote or mischaracterize someone , i catch hell too, so it works both ways. Accuracy is important.

Jeff, your first post referring to the other posters' purpose on the site (presumably mine) was spin. Not true. Spin. Go back and re-read the quote and the context in which it was written. I think if you want to criticize spin, perhaps you should not engage it in yourself?

Yes, please provide the exact quote where this poster "stated that his/her purpose on this site was to provide a pro-twi spin on things."

I can't answer it without getting into another brawl about the individuals involved in a situation being responsible for their own actions no matter who they might be, so I just thought it'd be better left alone. You can think what you will, but I'm not answering any more of your questions so don't bother asking.

BOY oh boy that's a loaded question. You know what? I'm going to decline to answer because its Wednesday and I don't feel like getting into a brawl today.

I honestly don't know yet, guess it all depends on if Pawtucket chooses to enforce what he posted on Friday, and how. But his statement could possibly be taken that way: Pro-Wierwille/twi spin could possibly be construed as the above, when it wasn't ever intended that way. Personally I think that it would be a mistake to censor anything out, but I'm not the one to make that final decision.

Call it what you want but censorship can happen by non-governmental entities. Look it up. Here's the first sentence in wikipedia: "Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful or sensitive, as determined by a censor."

That's the theme of the website, exposing the evils of twi. The emphasis already is on that. But if pro-Wierwille/twi spin isn't tolerated in the forums, what's left is possible twi-like censorship (i.e., there are some things you can't discuss and if you don't like it, leave). I'm not talking about being vulgar, heartless and disrespectful in posting, that's a given not to do; I'm talking about a legitimate opinion that, because it is construed by the owner of the website as offensive to victims' feelings, it is censored out. Respectful free speech is always the best way to go. The pro-Wierwille/twi spin here at GS are probably outnumbered 10 to 1 or more by the anti-Wierwille/twi spin. There's nothing to be afraid of, in my judgment.

Thanks for the tip Ham. The poster that personified this (for me) has been put on ignore. It works wonders and there may be more forthcoming.

Golly, I hope this isn't Genuine Spiritual Suspicion at work. :o To have a strong feeling based on one post seems ridiculous. I'm getting weary of answering all the nutty questions directed toward me, but ex you can PM me anytime if you ever want to talk things over privately. You may want to further explore whether that feeling is correct or incorrect.

now I see, I think this thread started off in the mud. This thread isn't about a memorial to Sandra, it's about condemnation of VP as a murderous monster. It was all but suggested in the first few posts. If we want to do a proper memorial for Sandra Ann Sullivan it should be posted in the "in memoriam" section of the forums where folks may share their feelings about Sandra and give respects and admiration for Sandra's life and the hope to see her smiling face again at the return of Christ, without malice toward anyone else.

From what I read about the incident these folks had no responsibility whatever. I am totally unsupportive and unsympathetic of VP's actions accusing way corps folks of the death of Gary Dunhoff. Never thought, wrote or suggested it was ok.

Paw, I went back and re-read my posts regarding sky and they have been respectful. I even thanked her after her last post. My opinions are disagreeable on certain elements, but respectful. No diminishment of others. I've posted much worse in the past, you know that. Anyway, have a great weekend, one and all.

Humiliating someone like this in public especially from the owner of a website does little but encourage anger and retribution, not repentance. Taking it private is the respectable and right thing to do, which is why its suggested in the forum rules.

Perhaps posts like this would best be PM'd to someone privately rather than humilate a poster in public. (Matthew 18:15)

Now wait a second, I'm not stomping on sky or judging any of her actions in this matter. When did I do that? In contrast, it is some of you folks who are calling her incident vile and lewd. I don't think she did anything wrong or should be ashamed about anything. Posters say Wierwille is vile and lewd. Ok folks are entitled to that opinion but I didn't stomp on sky in any way. I think the judgments and condemnations are coming from others, not me.

I re-read my posts relating to sky's story and don't see where I said it wasn't sexual in nature. Where do you get that from? I didn't say that. I opined it wasn't sexual sin. That's my opinion, you're entitled to yours. Did you read her post? Did you see another incident with Wierwille? Please quit asking me these moronic questions.

There is no evidence of that. She went through the whole Way process from WOW to Corps to Staff, without a similar incident from VP. Doesn't seem she was on his list.

There you go again with the idolatry accusation. Ok, you're entitled to your opinion. However in my opinion saying that over and over about a poster isn't in compliance with the forum rules.

I get your point, but I disagree. Yes the homosexual suggestion is vile to me. I think its sick. Now if a female leader wanted a massage from me, I'd have to consider what my mindset were at the time, but I would say generally it wouldn't be vile and disgusting for me to do that for her. Maybe you think that its vile and lewd to give a massage, and of course you have a right to your opinion. I disagree with your opinion that VP was grooming sky for future sexual contact with her. There is no evidence of that.

That was a nice twisting job of my post. You left out what got me nauseated, the homosexual suggestion. Was that intentional, or you just don't want to address that vile suggestion made by you? Maybe you are used to that kind of stuff, who knows. But never mind, no more questions will be answered by me from you. I have rocks in my head to try to answer in the first place judging from your last few disrespectful posts to me.

Sunesis, your post was nauseating because it had sort of a homosexual suggestion to it. uck. Whether you intended that, I can't say, but that's how it came off to me. Maybe that sort of thing isn't offensive to you, but I don't engage in it. Now let's say a female asked me to rub her buttocks, I'd choose what I want to do, but that shouldn't be a gay issue. Does that answer your question?

sky watcher, thanks for sharing.

Dear Fellow Greasespot Posters, Please abide by the forum rules and refrain from personal attacks. Lack of respect and insults directed at fellow posters will inevitably lead to more and more personal insults. Please note this excerpt from the rules:

Do you drive a vehicle? Under your criteria, going 1 mile over the speed limit would be a sin.