Linda Z

OldSkool said:

Ham said: That's pretty much what I do when I write something. The process for editing someone else's writing is similar. I usually correct clearcut errors electronically, and then when I think I've ferreted out most of those little rascals, I print out the document and read it again on paper. It's amazing what you can miss when staring at a computer screen. If I'm editing something that's extremely long, complex, and in extremely bad shape, I will clean up all the glaring errors--like misspellings, wrong format, bad punctuation, etc.--electonically, then print the whole mess out so that I can look over the organization, syntax, transitions, etc., more deliberately, mark the corrections, and then input and proof them. As for where the books and Way Magazine were printed, when I was in Way Pub/Way Mag (from 1982-86), neither the mag nor the books were printed at HQ. They didn't have the right kind of press. What they're doing now I couldn't tell you. Doesn't sound like they're producing any books these days anyway. In the 1980s, the books were printed by a big printer in Kingsport, TN. I don't remember where the mag was printed at that time.

I used to get a kick out of seeing that tepee in the campground every year. It definitely didn't belong to Bo. I remember it being there during the 80s, maybe as late as '85. I never heard a rule against the tepee being set up. Perhaps the owner of said tepee just got smart and quit going to the ROA.

Sounds like a pricey version of one of those "Who's Who in <fill in the blank>" books. You get a sappy letter: "You have been chosen as one of the up and coming young grand poobahs of whatever, and we want to put you in our Who's Who book. You only have to pay $XX so everyone will know how whosy whosy you are!" bleah

This sign I saw at a church might help: "Honk if you love Jesus. Text while driving if you want to meet him." Seriously, I won't argue the existence of a living Christ. I've had all the proof I need, but I don't think that would convince anyone who wants some sort of scientific evidence.

Thanks, erkjohn, for digging a little deeper. I had to come out of lurkdom to agree with you on this one. I also want to comment on Waysider's statement that "Speaking in tongues has been proven to decrease your level of resistance to suggestibility. (Reduces your ability to think on a critical level)." The Wikipedia article you quoted only cites 3 references under the "Neuroscience" subhead. One reference, as erkjohn has already pointed out, is to the study that involved only 5 subjects who, by the way, claimed that they SIT'd involuntarily, that they had no control over it. As erkjohn also has pointed out, a study with only 5 subjects hardly constitutes scientific "proof," regardless of whether it reached the conclusion you say it did. The second reference is to a poster presented at a meeting by some radiologists who evaluated only 3 subjects, which offers even less evidence than the study in the first reference. The third reference is to a NY Times article basically rehashing the 5-subject study and expanding on it. I'm defintely not seeing any "proof" here. I'm not interested in arguing the validity of SIT. I have my opinion and Waysider clearly has his. But what Waysider claims is "proven" clearly has not been proven. Getting back to the original subject of this thread, I have to say that those long, twi-leadership-heavy "lift lists" were tedious as he|| and stifled people's sponteneity and heartfelt prayer. Trying to legislate people's private prayer lives is just one more example of how twi leadership tried to stuff people into their mold. But it has no bearing on whether I SIT or not. I did it long before, during, and after twi--and today certanly not with an 8-page list of someone else's idea of who and what I should pray for. I don't think we have to throw out everything that was associated with twi. Sometimes at meals at HQ we ate strawberry shortcake. I enjoyed eating it before I was in twi, during my time in twi, and I still enjoy it today. I'm not going to stop eating strawberry shortcake or try to prove how bad it was just because it was served to me while on twi HQ staff.

Saw this on Saturday at a cemetery, and it made me chuckle.

Bow, there might have been trashing going on over there by some people that I didn't see because it happened before or after I looked at the posts and lurked there. My point was that when RR was called out for leveling this accusation against excathedra without substantiation, not only did he offer no proof, but it turns out he's not even registered on the site so he couldn't have seen what he accused her of for himself. As far as Paw getting trashed on the JW site, or anywhere, it's pretty obvious to me that anyone who runs an online discussion forum is going to be the object of criticism, some of it legitimate, some of it not. Misunderstandings happen. Mistakes happen. Anger flares. People feel wronged or get their feelings hurt, and they speak up. It sorta goes with the territory. Anyone who runs a site like this has to grow some thick skin, IMO. It's not fun, but it's not surprising. What's trashing to some may be voicing legitimate beefs to others. We don't know all sides of every story, do we? If you got spoken ill of on that site, I don't know why. I've never seen you do anything to warrant that. It's just my opinion, but I think if people who once participated here and now choose not to or were kicked off (not saying anyone was...just saying if) want to criticize how this site is run, it's their right. Their criticisms may be correct sometimes and sometimes not, but it's a public forum and subject to public comment. Some of this is a matter of perception. I'm sure people in twi look at all of us as people who "really benefited" from what they have to offer and are now "throwing temper tantrums" and "taking sides." I would disagree with that assessment, but it's how they view it. Clearly, many people have benefited from GSC, myself included. But if some people feel they were treated unfairly here, or don't like some of the decisions that have been made, they're probably going to say so. I got some benefit out of my time in twi, too, but that doesn't mean I won't speak up about the parts that weren't so beneficial.

I withheld comment on RR's sarcastic post to excathedra because I was waiting, watching, to see if his usual pattern would emerge. This time it starts with an unsubstantiated accusation and a mean-spirited zinger: BTW, when this same accusation about "trashing Pawtucket" was leveled at two or three GSC posters some time ago, I registered on the JW site, read the posts there, and lurked for a while to see if it was true or a product of the GSC rumor mill. It wasn't true. Were there criticisms about how some things were handled on this site? Yes, but no one was "trashing" anyone or naming names. Then someone calls him on his over-the-top remark: HAP, you must have missed equally cruel cracks made by RR to excathedra in the past. This isn't new territory. Next comes the feigned innocence with another not-so-subtle dig (in bold): If anyone on God's green earth thinks that the motor coach crack was made to make excathedra or anyone else "grin," I have some prime swamp land for sale. Call me. And when someone asks for the accusation to be backed up with fact: RR dodges that and responds with more sarcasm: Quelle surprise! "I'm not going to back up what I said. I'd rather just fling out the rumor and, for good measure, follow it with another zinger." Again, if anyone thinks "She's been through a lot" was said in sincere empathy and wasn't just another sarcastic dig, I also have an old Ford Pinto for sale. You're way too predictable, RR. Maybe if RR is finished back-pedaling, we could get back to the topic at hand, which prompted a good discussion, IMO.

Excellent suggestion, Waysider, thanks. It beats digging into the back of the closet for my old tax records! My statement shows 0 income from TWI for 82 and 83. Apparently twi complied with the law when it changed in 84, because my income is listed as "social security earnings" for the years 84 and 85. (I was only there 3 months of 86.)

In October of 1974 a law was passed exempting churches and their employees from paying social security and Medicare taxes. The law changed in 1984, and churches/church employees had to start paying into SS, although I don't remember having SS tax deducted in any of the years I was on staff (82-86).

Nicely said, Twinky. Penworks, I've never seen you be anything but polite. Your posts are informative and you stick to the facts as you see them rather than resorting to name calling and telling people to take a hike if they don't agree with you. I appreciate that about you. The next comment is for everyone and isn't directed specifically at Penworks (just to be clear): No one who's called for less harsh treatment of new posters has suggested that anyone should stop exposing twi for what it is. I know that certainly wasn't my point, but it seems as if some people are reacting as if that's what has been said. I forgot to say to Shellon, back on the first page, that I admire your nurturing soul. You're always ready to lend a hand, give a word of encouragement, join in prayer for those who ask (and probably some who don't). You're also qualified to give more help than some of the rest of us, given your chosen field. I don't think we can "meet everyone's needs," either. But some of us (not referring to you) could be more patient with new posters here.

Yep, she was a teacher in N. Carolina. I once met someone who had her for a teacher, but I don't remember who it was. If I remember correctly, one of her students got her into twi. Maybe they stopped doing the SS church exemption thing after left. Actually, I think it is important, as one more example of the double standards that prevail at twi HQ. I can think of a couple long-time staffers who were given the boot when they got too old or too sick, but since RFR's the head cheese (heh heh, head cheese), she'll probably retire when she's good and ready...in luxury, and with her pal Donna at her side.

Bolsh, I doubt she's getting much of .... check. She's been on staff since what, about 1979 or 80? That's 30 years of paying no SS tax (church exemption). No $ in, no $ out. Probably since she was a teacher before going on staff, she paid into a teachers' retirement fund. Regardless, I don't think Rosie is hurting for money. It's rumored that she's got loads of it. I don't know if that's true or an exaggeration, but the fact is, she was able to buy a very nice house with a pool while working on staff. And now she has a boat, I hear tell. She always had the best of clothes and drank her tea (so daintily) from an expensive Irish porcelain cup. Before she was even prez, she was touring Europe with her "BFF" Donna. She enjoyed a lifestyle far and above what most staff members ever dreamed of. Oh wait! She must have "believed" for that nice house and those nice clothes and the trips to Europe with Donna. Yeah, that's gotta be it.

Yeah, screw those unbelievers, right? Am I the only one who sees the similarity between what Garth has said and the us-them attitude twi pushed?

Tzaia said: I thought the once-new-and-improved rules were going to help this. I was apparently naive. Twinky said: Amen. When people do this, it very much reminds me of twi. One of the reasons (of many) that I walked away from twi was the constant in-your-face, "We Are Right!" attitude so many had. Some old friends of mine, exwayfers, are very involved in a couple twi offshoots. I see them two or three times a year, and when I do, I don't get in their faces and start yelling about how duped they are and how everything they ever believed was a sham. They know where I stand. When they say something I don't agree with, I just say, "I disagree." Simple. We might discuss it a bit, but they're adults. It's not my job to tell them what to believe or not believe. We come together on the things we have in common, like mutual affection and watching each other's children grow up and comforting each other when one a loved one is lost. We don't get together to argue and "confront" each other. I've been where they are. The fact that I decided to move on from such twi-influenced thinking and the fact that they still embrace a lot more of it than I do doesn't make me care any less for them or them for me. Call me soft-hearted or soft-headed or something, but I think a little more kindness and giving people the benefit of the doubt would go a loooooong way, along with letting them make up their own minds. Intolerance bugs me. It bugged me in twi, and it bugs me still. I'm sure many will disagree that it happens here. And I'm sure many innies disagree that it happens within the confines of twi, too. Thanks, Exsie, for bringing up this topic.

I think I know exactly what excathedra is saying. (Hi, exsie. ) I know lots of ex-Wayfers who don't come back here after a visit or two. It's not because they're so "pro-twi" or "pro-twi" doctrine. Yes, some people find the posts here hard to take because it tarnishes the image of people they once held in high regard. But I've talked to others who simply don't like the harsh tone often leveled at new posters who don't immediately jump on the everything-anti-twi bandwagon within their first couple of posts. If you think I'm exaggerating, then I think you might want to take a step back and try to put yourself in someone else's shoes for a minute. Of course some new people are going to come here "preaching." If they're still in twi or just got out, that's what they're used to, or maybe it's what they think they still should be doing. I know over a period of years that gets old, especially if you view these types of posts collectively ("Oh no, here comes another one"). But these are individuals, not a mob who have joined together to wreck anyone's day here. The defensive/aggressive posts I often see here may help people posting them to vent their outrage, but do they help anyone coming here for the first time? Who is this site for? Is it only for amusement of the long-time posters? Or is it also for people who first peek in, maybe timidly at first, or maybe with both barrels blazing, who might learn something or have something good to share if they aren't blasted out of the water their first few times here. It's possible to disagree with the "why don't you move on" posters without being defensive and hostile. Did you never defend anything about twi when you first got out, or when you first found this site?

This is for real. Every time you go to the site and click on the big purple button on the home page, sponsors of the site donate toward food for strays/rescues, etc. You can visit and click daily. If you buy anything from the store there, more food is donated. There's a huge selection, from little gift items to art and nice jewelry. I've bookmarked it at the top of my list, to help me remember to stop by daily. You can also donate there to specific animal rescue causes, such as spaying and neutering, buying vaccines, helping to care for special needs animals, rescuing animals after disasters, etc.. A $10 donation to one of those gets you free shipping on your order, and there's a facebook link to click to find out about other discounts/deals. I got $10 off my order from that. Pretty cool. I hate malls, so I was happy to find some nice Christmas gifts, including a little something for myself. Check it out! http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=3

Here's another preventative measure to consider: vitamin D supplements. Unless you live in a really sunny climate, you're probably vitamin D deficient, at least in the winter months, and one of the things vitamin D does is boost your immune system. I've noticed a big difference in the severity and duration of cold/flu bugs since I started taking it (my level was extremely low when I was tested). My doctor says it's the only vitamin he takes. At work I just got a press release from a doctor confirming the importance of adequate vitamine D. He said that the normal recommended dosage isn't enough. You might want to ask your doctor about this if you tend to be vulnerable to colds and flu.

Patriot, that doesn't surprise me. I remember Donna M screaming at all the staff women at lunch one time, saying that they should be able to work full-time, manage their homes, care for their children, blah blah blah, without complaint. The bottom line was (paraphrased, but this was her point), "If you think you have too much to do around here, tough. Shut up and do it, and you'd better have a freakin' smile on your face while you're at it!" Her shout-fest wasn't well received by the moms, given that she had housekeepers, nannies, drivers, etc., and she wasn't even working full-time. She was too busy hanging out with her BFF RFR.

That's probably correct, Rejoice. In DM's original post he made a point of following her for 5 miles, so in my initial post that was in my mind.

OldSkool, thanks for bringing us up to date. I've had no contact with anyone at HQ since 1989, so this was all new info to me. Interesting that they brought in "cult experts!" I wonder if it was those Scientology people who took over some anticult group? (Didn't that happen at one point, or am I loopy?) What you heard that RFR said behind closed doors about hating the changes is sooooooo like her. She's such a phony. I've posted before that she used to tell the department receptionist to lie if VPW called for her, saying she didn't know where Rosalie was. And for public consumption she smiled and nodded at Craig, but behind his back it was clear she had little use for him. I'm not surprised to see she hasn't changed. Today I work in a corporate environment. Some micromanaging goes on at work sometimes, but no one tries to run my life on my time. If anyone told me I had weekly mandatory meetings at night and on weekends, I'd show them my "Been there" T-shirt and start looking for another job! When I signed on to work on staff, I had no inkling how little time I'd have for living life outside the confines of twi hq, or I wouldn't have done it. Probably the most revealing remark RFR ever made to me was during one of my annual evaluations. I told her that with all the meetings and extra work hours, I had no time for myself, to simply read the Bible and study on my own. Her answer: "You don't need to do that. You [because I worked on the Way Mag and other publications] are reading the Word all day at work every day." Pretty strange thing for an uppity-up in a Biblical research organization to say. Twinky, count your lucky stars. I couldn't wait to join HQ staff when I got that assignment. Silly me!!

DWBH, because I think it might be intimidating for a woman to be followed and then questioned by a way-over-6-ft. stranger, that makes me a cultist? Well, excuuuuuuse me, but I think that's a reasonable, objective view.