Lifted Up

Oldies, I agree with you. There was plenty of good. Ironically, I've seen enough of your posts acknowledging the bad in TWI to get you accused of having a bias against TWI teachings in some circles.

Bozz...greetings as well...I wish you'd post some more so we can get to know you better. Your admission that the good old days weren't always good shows you understand that they werent good for everyone. As long as we keep that undrstanding, I see nothing wrong with remembering them as you do.

I know what you mean. Me too with things like that, and when someone has to start their case with "These are the FACTS", which illustrates to me that there is some reason to DOUBT their "facts". Anyway this is why, before I respond to such comments, I put myself in the place of the person who made them to understand why it was said. In this case it sounds to me like the poster went through a terrible or at least unpleasant experience, and may be fed up with people making their judgement on her character as to how she handled the situation. Yes, I could be wrong. Very easily, since I don't know the poster. But I would rather assume that she made the comment because of previous hurt, and not because of failure to be open minded.

Wacky, I'm guessing it isn't by far...as with you and me and the rest of us. I suspect he chose this particular one to post for a reason.

Ha ha ha ha ha...my Lions beat 'em...ON THE ROAD!!!!!!

Typical uplifting Digi message. But I doubt if she knows how to do otherwise. I think it is an idea that some of the rest of us can follow. Supporting someone without chopping someone else down, I mean. I didn't think there was anything wrong in the least with my previous post. Then later I read it from the point of view of the poster to whom I responded (Mark). I realized that I could be accusing him not of doing an insensitive thing, but of being an insensitive person, when I don't know the least about him personally. I dont know if he has taken/will take it that way. I definitely did not intend it that way. Good grief, I am too conscious of my own weak points these days to even think that of someone I don't know. My thinking when I posted somewhat earlier was just because someone didn't intend to hurt or offend someone not only doesn't mean you didn't hurt or offend them, but it doesn't excuse you if you do it unintended. I think most people realize this; that's why the classic "I'm sorry if you were offended by what I did" seems like such a hollow non-apology. I wqs trying to make the point that WG had been hurt; whether it was intened or not doesn't make much difference if you are the target. But then I look at my post and see I could have done the same thing. Dunno, maybe Mark didnt even take it that way. Doesn't matter. The point is, since I don't know him, he easily could have from my point of view. So Mark, I apologize. I won't back down from saying I understand how WG was hurt by some responses, but for me I think a response such as Digi made is the better way to go.

I understand here that you are saying we need to be consistent in our sensitivity, or lack thereof. So, if we are not sensitive to Oldies or Mike or Catholics, we don't need to be sensitive to WG. And if we should be sensitive to some of them, we should be sensitive to all. It does sound like you are saying, because some have been insensitive to you as a Catholic, you don't need to be sensitive to WG. Justice, I guess, though I would like to think I wouldn't respond to someone's flaming of me by taking it out on someone else.

Only used to be? I know what you mean, but maybe we live if seperate worlds...I hear that word a lot...on the new (especially by TV weather broadcasters) as well as in other walks of life, including preachers. It is "tolko" in Russian.

...from the website of...so it says...an Ethiopian Airlines magazine... Ethiopia the origin of Coffee More than 1,000 years ago, a goatherd in Ethiopia’s south-western highlands plucked a few red berries from some young green trees growing there in the forest and tasted them. He liked the flavour – and the feel-good effect that followed. Today those self-same berries, dried, roasted and ground, have become the world’s second most popular non-alcoholic beverage after tea. And, as David Beatty discovers in words and pictures, the Ethiopian province where they first blossomed – Kaffa – gave its name to coffee.

Someone clear something up then...is mark and avoid dead or not?

There are of course reasons why they would want to keep their communication private. Of course much of what we have gotten over the years from "innes" is from those on their way out or looking for the same.

Of course not. But if the decision of those non drinkers not to drink is ridiculed in that bar, it would obviously mean that those who don't drink weren't welcome there.

One often used way to ridicule someone is to describe his/her actions in a way that is easier to mock. Oh, I know what Garth is talking about. Having been around Waydale/ GS for several years...as he has...I have seen a number of people announce they were leaving, and some of those have came back anyway. In fact, I was tempted myself a couple times in the past to respond specifically to someone's announcement. but I resisted that temptation. First of all, I realized they weren't going away "in a huff", which is really a way to describe them as a snotty "I'll show you" person. It's like they were saying, I'll show you; you'll be sorry when I'm gone", as if we knew all about what was in their minds when we describe them that way. I think it was obvious that WG was hurt and wasn't even close to that kind of attitude. If someone thinks she overreacted, why not try to understand why. I don't think that is the case anyway. I am not only thinking the best of someone (heavens, do that??) , but am accepting the word of the only person (as far as I know) who has posted on this thread who knws WG. The idea that we are always free to vent our frustrations in whatever words we want, regardless of whether or not we hurt someone...because, after all, those frustrations are justified...is wrong IMO. Working for the government, one of the things we get hit with is having to learn about sexual harrasment. The main theme is that sexual harrasment is not defined as what is intended, but how it is received. I frankly once didn't see that reasoning until it dawned on me that it involved the principle of considering what the other person thinks or feels, instead of throwing your language or pictures or whatever around with only thoughts for what you think is right. If I have any beef with the emphasis on that subject now, it is that other forms of harassment have been tolerated without regard to what "the other person feels." But since sexual harassment can be so very personal, I can also see where the emphasis comes from. If I started to ridicule those who claim to have been hurt by sexual abuse in TWI, instead of making some of the current efforts I am making to learn more about how people may have been deeply hurt, I imagine I qould quickly hear from the top. Such as if I suggested that there was "overreacting" involved. Should we show less care for the feelings of people who might be hurt by our "justified" reactions? No, we don't live in an idea world, so I suppose we can justify anything we say by that.

I have some rather strong opinions on reading this thread with the responses and the responses to the responses, etc. , but I will hold off on them while I consider them further...then decide if it would make any sense to respond here. Except... One person in particular who has posted here I know is very caring. NOT to imply others are not, no way, but I know this one is from a very short but caring message that I received several years ago, that was more important than the person will ever realize. Maybe that is what we should consider...the caring part I mean...when we respond.

I'd like to know what he would say about this incident now, heh heh.

I'm with you. Unfortunately, the a-word is a very hot potato likely to trigger pointed responses from both sides. Her purpose was obviously to describe her experience, not start a debate, which can be gotten into easily enough on other threads if one wishes.

I'll be the first to acknowledge my experience was limited, but I never know a WOW family that was gender imbalanced...which maonly included Indy and the WOW branch I helped run at Philly during my interim year. Whether married couples were involved or not, gender wise all the families I ever knew of were all men, all women, or 2/2. I wonder if there were any that were 3/1 the other way.

That is because you were. IMO anyway. I was not, of course, around for the ROA in its later years. But this testimony seems to me an accurate and honest description of the earlier years. Does the wonderful picture presented by such good memories mean that everything was right with TWI in those years? But perhaps it is important to acknowledge such factors to understand why people hung around so long. I bet it is at least one of the reasons, Rascal, that you hung around as long as you did.

Since the word "programmed" was used in the strip, that makes the known absence of coffee the deprogramming agent.

That doesn't surprise me at all, even though I didn't see it live. Basically, it means that those of us who saw the movie and thought it was good and funny, missed the total magic of seeing it live. And those who have seen that magic have a real letdown. I wonder how good that touring production would have been. It was supposed to come here in February, but the tour was cancelled, no doubt because of the movie release. Without the original cast, I suppose it simply would have depended dearly on how well it was done. ...and I hope your viewing it and making your comments mean that the troubles you referred to earlier have been resolved ot alleviated.

A strip from today's paper on the meaning of coffee... here

Yea, why not? I do it a lot at home anyway.

We know it couldn't have been operator error, unless you missed your cup.

Evidently you need a professional to believe for the good weather, because from what I am reading here, ROA weather turned sour after my inglorious exit. I think it was at my last ROA, or was it at HQ in residence right after that, I told Vince Finnegan that the weather looked good for the next several hours (the skies looked threatening to him). He looked at me funny and said, what are you, a weatherman? heh heh heh

Then the mid to late 70s must have been the good old days with weather at the Rock as well.