satori001

What the hell is reproof, anyway? I mean, in the real world. In the absence of respect for one another's bibilical rebuttals, most Greasespot reproof is an appeal to logic, or to emotion. Logical Reproof: "If x is true, and y is true, than z is true, and you are wrong." Emotional Reproof: "Excuse me, but you're incorrect on that last point, motherf*cker!! Stealth Reproof: "If only certain people - wink, wink - of the baser sort wouldn't be so wrong, and be more like me." What other kinds of extra-biblical reproof are there, and more importantly, how do YOU handle them? Does it matter where it's coming from? Or from whom? Does it matter how it's "motivated?" Does it matter if their spelling is correct? Are you embarrassed or ashamed? Are you angry? Are you quick to apologize, maybe even too quick? What are your thoughts? (There is no guarantee someone will not reprove you for them, but they themselves will then risk reproof reproof.) -- edited to add this question so it stays in the "About the Way" Forum, which is where I intended to put it: How does GS reproof compare with, differ from, TWI reproof you have experienced?

Isn't this why a "scientific accuracy and mathmatical exactitude" is a pile of crap when applied to ancient, middle-eastern scripture, or today's paper, and anyone claiming to offer such precision is probably... lying?

This one?OH WELL - FLEETWOOD MAC DON'T ASK ME ABOUT THE SHAPE I'M IN I CAN'T SING I AIN'T PRETTY AND MY LEGS ARE THIN DON'T ASK ME WHAT I THINK OF YOU I MIGHT NOT GIVE YOU THE ANSWERS THAT YOU WANT ME TO GOD COME TO ME 'N SAID DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND STICK BY ME I'LL BE YOUR GUIDING HAND DON'T ASK ME ABOUT THE SHAPE I'M IN I CAN'T SING I AIN'T PRETTY AND MY LEGS ARE THIN solo DON'T ASK ME ABOUT THE SHAPE I'M IN I CAN'T SING I AIN'T PRETTY AND MY LEGS ARE THIN DON'T ASK ME ABOUT THE SHAPE I'M IN I CAN'T SING I AIN'T PRETTY AND MY LEGS ARE THIN DON'T ASK ME WHAT I THINK OF YOU I MIGHT NOT GIVE YOU THE ANSWERS THAT YOU WANT ME TO

I dunno. Here's a hypothetical. If I were the Corps Coordinator at Emporia, and I had a young woman under my responsibility come back from LEAD with terrible injuries, and depression, and on prescription pain killers (at the very least) - I might have two choices, give or take: 1. We make every effort to nurse her back to health right here on the premises, arrange for a good doctor, and physical therapy, and surround her with the love of God in Christ, and all the longsuffering and believing of "God's best," the Way Corps, setting a great example for the entire Corps of unconditional love - yeah, "No one left behind!" Or... 2. Now that's she's become a real pain in the foot, and I'm getting flack (a.k.a., "nazi'd") from upstairs at HQ, she's outta here! Pack it up and hit the road, baby. You're somebody else's problem, as of now. Don't let the door hit you in the foot on the way out! Bless you abundantly, and elsewhere. Decisions, decisions. Hmm, WWJD? (What would Jesus Judas do?)

Josie We're gonna break out the hats and hooters When Josie comes home We're gonna rev up the motor scooters When Josie comes home to stay We're gonna park in the street Sleep on the beach and make it Throw down the jam till the girls say when Lay down the law and break it When Josie comes home When Josie comes home So good She's the pride of the neighborhood She's the raw flame The live wire She prays like a Roman With her eyes on fire Jo would you love to scrapple She'll never say no Shine up the battle apple We'll shake 'em all down tonight We're gonna mix in the street Strike at the stroke of midnight Dance on the bones till the girls say when Pick up what's left by daylight When Josie comes home When Josie comes home So bad She's the best friend we ever had She's the raw flame The live wire She prays like a Roman With her eyes on fire When Josie comes home So good She's the pride of the neighborhood She's the raw flame The live wire She prays like a Roman With her eyes on fire Of course, I didn't know her, but these lyrics describe a woman in love with life.

How about a real-life example? To lie is to make a deliberately inaccurate statement. Catcup recently called me a liar for saying she was a long time staffer, and "expelled." (I also added an unflattering description of her status as a "pampered lap-dog.") She said it was a lie, that she had only been on staff from 82 to 83 - or something like that, and had left voluntarily - in fact, Cummins had begged them to stay. Now, if you're not particularly happy where you are, that can still be a very long time, but I had the impression she'd been there much longer. I apologized, saying I'd got it wrong, but she came back and said it did'nt justify the "lie." Well, I found the post, if you'll permit me. I don't particularly like Catcup, no secret there, so I don't read her posts, unless they are part of a thread I'm following. But this one gave me a pretty clear, if inaccurate, impression of her tenure at WayWorld. If I'd read other posts, I'd have noticed something missing. Judge for yourselves: Now the remark about being ostracized rather than M&A led me to think she'd been booted. Was it unfair to base my judgement on that post alone? Sloppy maybe, but it only confirmed an impression I'd had for a while, based only the few of her posts, and RG's, that I'd read. I didn't really think of the time line - the "15 years" just stuck in my mind.Is Catcup's statement "deliberately inaccurate?" No, she just left a few parts out. Was mine deliberately inaccurate? No, it wasn't either - in my opinion. Now the "pampered" thing, I can see, might not occur to a staffer working for Howard Allen's wife Emogene, the soap opera-lovin, anal-retentive, psycho-puppy boss from hell. But I was referring to the "status" so important to many Corps, clergy and staffers. After all, TWI was and is nothing if not a "caste society." Anything at all could be considered "pampering," in the atmosphere of deprivation TWI leadership created there. Ego-perks, in a cult = pampering. Being on the research team afforded that, if not from the top, at least from the larger household. That's how I see it. Lie? A subjective call? Truth with a lower-case 't?' This all came up because, well, she just hadda offer her (negative) unsolicited and off-topic opinion about myself. All of those suggesting I would be the better person for not responding, I wonder if you've been giving her the same, sage advice. Maybe. Anyway, to mischaracterize someone can sometimes be a lie, and so I thought she was lying about me. What a tangled web. Hope this thread stays on topic. It could be worthwhile.

Maybe now's the time to re-apply oldiesman.

Sorry vickles. I keep thinking it's over, and then another one comes along. How can I not respond to what she wrote? Really, how?

In other words, Catcup, I recognized your virtually baseless inuendo for what it was. You are one of the prime manipulators here, if not the only one.

Festivus, by the way, is from Seinfeld. It was the Costanza family holiday. "Festivus for the rest of us." I missed that episode but I love the concept. One of its elements is the "airing of grievances," where Mr. Costanza tells his family all the ways in which they have disappointed him in the past year. One of Catcup's posts suddenly reminded of the Costanza family's airing of grievances.

You can call me santori all you want, HCM

We stop saying what we think. That's the safest way.

Speaking of "venom," hey, Catcup's back. Praise Allah. Your 2nd post was not "minding your own business." I should have ignored it anyway.

Okay, there are manipulators. That's kind of what I'm saying, rascal. I've also said I regret some of my part in this. I've also said the manipulation goes beyond what we've seen on the thread, and may be from outside of Greasespot. Live and learn.

I don't know what this means.There are two "culpabilities" here. 1. TWI's culpability for the LEAD 104 accident, and all consequences, including Rochelle's subsequent depression and death. 2. the culpability for derailing this thread, mine or otherwise I never said HCW was culpable for anything. Is that what you think, or was it something else. I don't want HCW to acknowledge anything he doesn't want to. I was using the forum, as others did, to express my view of TWI's role in the accident. A number of other posters agreed with my view, in whole or in part. I believe that made somebody very uncomfortable, and they effectively made the thread about me and my "antagonistic" ways. I am extremely antagonistic toward TWI, and I believe, justifiably so. A long list of VPW's predatory actions are just the beginning of my antogonism. I wonder why some people take that very personally, unless they support TWI still.

The "perception" did become a distraction, but I didn't create it. It was created for your "benefit" by a few others, both on and (I believe) off the thread, before the "fighting" even got started. HCW was reacting beforehand. Others too, over-reacting. Nobody will accept this without going back and looking for themselves, so I'm not going to try here.

Yes, a life tossed. You didn't say lost, you said tossed. Tossed implies culpability.Now, I have no way of knowing what HCW is ready for or not ready for, other than to believe what he says. He sure seemed ready. At one point, referring to Rochelle's death, he said, "if you're mad now, just wait." That more than implies the element of culpability. It also sounds like he's ready to deal with it here. So I do think I'm seeing the big picture, just the same.

Garth, you don't agree. I kind of expect that. What did you mean by this? How does being "straight out" agree with that?

I don't doubt the latter statement, although it depends what you mean by "it." If you mean, he's smart enough to arrive at your opinion of me, then somebody like you might be inclined to help him get there a little sooner. Plausible, no?As for Trancechat's vulnerabilities, and Greasespot's improvements, I could easily open an email account almost anywhere and call it Hope_R@freemail.com. I could throw in a few references from the thread, use your vocabulary, and who's gonna question it, as long as it sounds measured and sympathetic? HCW could be having a "confidential" email correspondence with you, and you'd never know about it. If not you, anybody else. WayGB is "crafty" enough to figure that out, don't you think? Doesn't even need to be WayGB. Could be anybody with a dog in the fight. Come to think of it, you Hope, of all people, should know about email/chat room campaigns and stuff. Right? (wink, wink)

I probably won't accept it rascal, but you haven't even said what you think it is. What is the bigger picture, as you see it?If I had died as a result of this accident, and I were looking down on Greasespot, would I rather see: 1) lots of sympathy for my tragic and untimely demise? 2) the truth about what really happened? I guess I'd like both, but the truth would be more important, personally. How about you?

duplicate

Really? Well it reminds me of a memorial breaking out in the middle of a public square, because the people protesting the most couldn't make the effort of posting a true memorial to Rochelle in the "In Memoriam" Forum, where memorials are appropriate.HCW started this thread as a factual account of the events (and presumably, causes) that led to poor Rochelle's fate. He dedicated the thread to her memory, and rightly so. This thread is contentious because it concerns ERROR, FAULT, TRAGEDY at Way World. People have strong feelings about those things, none of us being exactly strangers to them. -- I re-read much of this thread, trying to figure out how it got so out of hand. Things really turned against yours truly when I began to turn up the heat on Way leadership. Isn't that interesting? If you'll trouble yourselves to review the thread, if you can stop throwing stones for just a moment, you might begin to wonder yourselves. HCW pretty much suddenly started taking offense where none (yes NONE) was intended. Remember "Satori, can you READ?" It's bothered me, to be honest. You who know me will concede that I've never shied away from expressing my contrarian "judgement." I say what I think. I think I was pretty clear - about fault and responsibility, and so on. Either HCW has a major chip on his shoulder (only here for me), or I have to wonder what's happening behind the scenes. Why would HCW suddenly have a real problem with me, when I'm not trying to give him a hard time, unless people are telling him (with friendly advice) that I'm the bad guy here? What in my posts would make him think so, and to such an extreme? I don't mind being the "bad guy" if I believe I'm in the right. I'm not complaining about the sudden stampede of critics. Like someone said, it's like the "nibbling of ducks." Painless. What I'm saying is, there seems to be a concerted effort to change the subject. A lot of you went from saying my posts were "spot-on," etc, to mean, venomous, etc. Conspiracy theory? Yeah, sure. Just a theory. This shouldn't be considered a derail, or about me. It's about the things I've brought up, and the concerted effort to divert you from what I've been saying. WayGB? There's a thought. Is there a precedent? Why sure, keeds. Didn't Waydale's founder do the same thing on Trancenet before he left the fold? Wasn't one of his duties to .... with the posters, get them to fight, etc? Ya don't think they'd try that again, do ya? I don't care if you guys hate me. I really don't. I do care about the truth, and it's not being served. I think HCW deserves a lot of credit, but I also think some people out there are messin' with him, and with Greasespot. It's not about me. It really isn't. I'm just another "weenie" here, and content with that. My conduct hasn't been perfect. I regret responding to Catcup, despite her provocations. (Read for yourself.) Other things. There's still a bigger picture here. Can you see it?

It's tragic that some refuse to see the significance of TWI's depraved indifference to the safety of LEAD participants, in particular the ill-fated LEAD 104 - for whom The Way International showed more contempt than compassion.The trailer is a key to the event - not just the physical causes, but the reasons behind those causes.

The title of the thread: The L.E.A.D. accident. What happened? I still think it's a good question. It was dedicated to Rochelle, if I recall. It was not to be a eulogy, though she has been eulogized, and deserves to be.