Eagle, opposit IS ok...what isn`t is that he calls people liars because their experiences of abuse do not line up with his views of twi...
Show me a post where he did this.
Hey, don't get me wrong. I hate the way. I also hated almost EVERY corp-nazi I ever met. This is also why I didn't make it very long in the way. Like the butwipes REALLY thought I'd bend over and kiss their skanky butts uh, green name-tags.
Eagle, I remember when you were going into the way corp. I was happy for you cause you really wanted to do it, but at the same time, I was concerned you would turn into a jerk like all the rest of them. Sadly, you were too kind and decent for the way corp. (although getting dropped was probably the best thing that could have happened to you.)
**Disclaimer--I am not saying that every person who went into the way corp was a nasty person. It was just my unfortunate experience that THAT was the only kind of corp people I met during my short tenure with TWI.
Bluzeman, I'll readily admit that my short-term memory isn't what it use to be BUT, I can easily remember that the subject of this off-shoot thread was splintered off the John Juedes thread because of this issue over the accusation that Oldieman calls people (VICTIMS) of bad experiences LIARS. In that thread you back-tracked on your question and yet here you are asking the same thing again. What's up with that?
I agree, for the most part, with you. What I question is -- If you have little respect for what someone else says, why would you even dignify their opinion with a response?
Well, sometimes because you feel that other readers who don't know who they are dealing with need to read your response to that person, even though you know that person will not heed it in any way.
Well, sometimes because you feel that other readers who don't know who they are dealing with need to read your response to that person, even though you know that person will not heed it in any way.
I can understand that. However, as you might see, doing so usually leads to a complete derail of a thread necessitating an Administrator having to splinter off those off-topic responses into a different thread. It must be frustrating to Pawtucket to have to do that. That and other readers having to sift through such nonsense to read where the original subject of the thread left off. Something to consider whenever you have an urge to respond to someone who you have very little respect for anyways. But -- oh well -- like I've heard so many times. "S**t happens."
Bluzeman, I'll readily admit that my short-term memory isn't what it use to be BUT, I can easily remember that the subject of this off-shoot thread was splintered off the John Juedes thread because of this issue over the accusation that Oldieman calls people (VICTIMS) of bad experiences LIARS. In that thread you back-tracked on your question and yet here you are asking the same thing again. What's up with that?
OK, this is getting stupid. I did NOT back track on a damn thing. I wrongly understood WordWolf to be saying that Oldiesman had accused a VICTIM OF TWI'S ABUSE of being a liar. THAT was my original question. THAT has not been proven. THEN Rascal says once again, that he has called VICTIMS OF TWI'S ABUSE liars. I asked her so show me where.
You know what Larry? I have to much going on right now for this stupd petty stuff. You and Rascal can take GS and just shove it up your freaking arse. Not worth my time to even post here anymore.
Bluzeman, I'll readily admit that my short-term memory isn't what it use to be BUT, I can easily remember that the subject of this off-shoot thread was splintered off the John Juedes thread because of this issue over the accusation that Oldieman calls people (VICTIMS) of bad experiences LIARS. In that thread you back-tracked on your question and yet here you are asking the same thing again. What's up with that?
Perhaps a clarification is in order. Oldiesman hardly ever really *calls* anyone LIARS and VICTIMS. BUT stick around a while and you will see heavy implications. I'll dig up a thread from a year ago and PM it to you.
Hey, don't get me wrong. I hate the way. I also hated almost EVERY corp-nazi I ever met. This is also why I didn't make it very long in the way. Like the butwipes REALLY thought I'd bend over and kiss their skanky butts uh, green name-tags.
Eagle, I remember when you were going into the way corp. I was happy for you cause you really wanted to do it, but at the same time, I was concerned you would turn into a jerk like all the rest of them. Sadly, you were too kind and decent for the way corp. (although getting dropped was probably the best thing that could have happened to you.)
**Disclaimer--I am not saying that every person who went into the way corp was a nasty person. It was just my unfortunate experience that THAT was the only kind of corp people I met during my short tenure with TWI.
Rick
Right on Rick!...You are correct, not every person who went into the waycorps was a nasty person...but a LOT of them became nasty people as a result of their waycorps training....and I WAS in the waycorp...during my time in residence at Emporia and Rome city, I continually had to fight within my own mind not to abandon my "laid back" personality, my tendencies to treat people kindly with gentleness and respect...and to hold onto my individuality (especially when it came to HOW I treated others)...
The waycorps trained people to feel smugly superior, to be mean spirited and to treat others disrespectfully...and that's my opinion.
Those who refused to submit to the corp's "nazi" approach to Christian service, never rose very high within the ranks of the waytree.
I have to much going on right now for this stupd petty stuff.
By all means -- you should take care of the things going on in your personal life. You're absolutely right -- this stuff is petty in the grand scheme of things.
Back to our regularly scheduled topic....
Trying to confuse me doojable? In another page or two I'll probably forget what that subject was.
I think the folks who accuse me of calling posters liars are taking my posts/opinions way too seriously. They must have a lot of spare time on their hands. Not that I don't. :D
They must have a lot of spare time on their hands. Not that I don't.
Ain't THAT the truth! But, if it wasn't interesting and fun I surely wouldn't be spending my time here.
I think the real problem is that people have been so hurt by the things people (in the Way) have done to them that they wear their feelings on their sleeves. I understand that.
Perhaps a clarification is in order. Oldiesman hardly ever really *calls* anyone LIARS and VICTIMS. BUT stick around a while and you will see heavy implications. I'll dig up a thread from a year ago and PM it to you.
Back to our regularly scheduled topic.....;)
Dooj...Why not post it here for all to read?...
..I have noticed over a long period of time that oldiesman has a tendency to downplay the testamonies of twi victims...and to defend twi. I think he fails to understand the dynamics of "groupthink" and other psychological factors that influence a person when they become involved with a cult...
During my time with twi, I found myself doing things that I disagreed with and that I thought were wrong...why?...because when you get "swept away" by a religious cult, the tendency is to think that you must be wrong to disagree with your teachers, leaders, and those in whom you look towards for guidance...to disagree oftentimes brings feelings of guilt upon yourself...
Wierwille was a middle aged man who was held in the highest esteem and considered to be the "man of God"...his followers were young people who were seeking answers and were submissive to him and defered to his judgements...
...what I just stated is nothing new here...it's been stated before...however, there have been certain people who dismiss this line of reasoning (oldiesman) and have asserted that there are no victims because people agreed to follow Wierwille...this is a cold calculated approach to logic which does not take into account the dynamics of the situation and displays an opinion that is void of understanding human nature and the relationships between teacher and student...especially in a religious setting.
She must have her reasons. I wouldn't put her on the spot over it. When she PMs me I'll post the link to what she's referring to IF she has no objections.
It was one of those rare moments when I was trying to "behave."
Ok. I can believe that. ;)
BTW -- I started to read Oldiesman's posts from day one (I think). There's 148 pages of his posts. If it's going to be a lot of trouble for you Doojable don't fret it. Maybe we should just let this one die.
There are 13 pages - some of it very difficult and painful for a few posters here - so please be respectful in responding. If anyone wants to say something mean, PM me and don't post it here (better yet, just don't say it at all.)
There are some oldies but goodies there. Here's one from 2002:
A poster commented:
Leisure-suit Vic, better-named Daddy Sleezeball to the many admiring sheep even yet deceived by the old, dead goat's religious dog and pony show, led the way to perdition for so many young women in TWI earnest to find God before the old perv got his hands on them. I hope devils are stoking the coals under his twisting, smoldering carcass somewhere in Hell right now.
I answered:
IMHO, I really wish the moderators of this site would censure this garbage. Because this really isn't about VPW. It's about the relentless rantings of some people who never had the courage to stand up to VPW while he was alive, but now some 17 years later after his death, hide under handles, needing to massage their own ever inflating cowardly egos and elevating their self-propagating sinless existences by their endless overly-pious putdowns and diatribes directed toward folks like me, who still respect VPW for teaching the Word.
Oldiesman, with all due respect -- What would be the point of continuing this discussion? No matter what I don't think anyone will change their opinion of you. Having read through about seven pages of your posts I personally think you're a very reasonable person and I found myself agreeing with much that you said. But here's the thing (and what concerned me the most) -- reliving past discussions for some people might be too much for them to handle. That's why I thought doojable originally intended on just PMing me a link to those threads -- to spare the sensibilities of those who (for whatever reason) found offense in your comments. I don't know if it's really worth it but, I'm certainly in no position to "kill" the thread.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
6
6
9
16
Popular Days
Jul 10
23
Jul 11
23
Jul 12
16
Jul 9
8
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 6 posts
WordWolf 6 posts
Ham 9 posts
Larry N Moore 16 posts
Popular Days
Jul 10 2007
23 posts
Jul 11 2007
23 posts
Jul 12 2007
16 posts
Jul 9 2007
8 posts
excathedra
big snort
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
I've seen a lot worse. And people on GS know who that is. Oldies generally has been pretty good. I know he has opposite views.
It's okay.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Eagle, opposit IS ok...what isn`t is that he calls people liars because their experiences of abuse do not line up with his views of twi...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Yeah.. a wascal, aren't I?
hmmm. I wonder.. we could call this thread "the first church (or splinter) of the Juedites", coundn't we?
Sorry John..
it's been a good day here at the spot..
especially good if I can manage to invoke one of exie's snorts..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Honestly.. to take over the "hive".. you have to smell like the "queen".
I think the "man" rolled in vic's remains..
even his writings smell like the vicster..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bluzeman
Show me a post where he did this.
Hey, don't get me wrong. I hate the way. I also hated almost EVERY corp-nazi I ever met. This is also why I didn't make it very long in the way. Like the butwipes REALLY thought I'd bend over and kiss their skanky butts uh, green name-tags.
Eagle, I remember when you were going into the way corp. I was happy for you cause you really wanted to do it, but at the same time, I was concerned you would turn into a jerk like all the rest of them. Sadly, you were too kind and decent for the way corp. (although getting dropped was probably the best thing that could have happened to you.)
**Disclaimer--I am not saying that every person who went into the way corp was a nasty person. It was just my unfortunate experience that THAT was the only kind of corp people I met during my short tenure with TWI.
Rick
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Bluzeman, I'll readily admit that my short-term memory isn't what it use to be BUT, I can easily remember that the subject of this off-shoot thread was splintered off the John Juedes thread because of this issue over the accusation that Oldieman calls people (VICTIMS) of bad experiences LIARS. In that thread you back-tracked on your question and yet here you are asking the same thing again. What's up with that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheHighWay
Well, sometimes because you feel that other readers who don't know who they are dealing with need to read your response to that person, even though you know that person will not heed it in any way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
I can understand that. However, as you might see, doing so usually leads to a complete derail of a thread necessitating an Administrator having to splinter off those off-topic responses into a different thread. It must be frustrating to Pawtucket to have to do that. That and other readers having to sift through such nonsense to read where the original subject of the thread left off. Something to consider whenever you have an urge to respond to someone who you have very little respect for anyways. But -- oh well -- like I've heard so many times. "S**t happens."
Edited by Larry N MooreLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bluzeman
OK, this is getting stupid. I did NOT back track on a damn thing. I wrongly understood WordWolf to be saying that Oldiesman had accused a VICTIM OF TWI'S ABUSE of being a liar. THAT was my original question. THAT has not been proven. THEN Rascal says once again, that he has called VICTIMS OF TWI'S ABUSE liars. I asked her so show me where.
You know what Larry? I have to much going on right now for this stupd petty stuff. You and Rascal can take GS and just shove it up your freaking arse. Not worth my time to even post here anymore.
Rick
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Perhaps a clarification is in order. Oldiesman hardly ever really *calls* anyone LIARS and VICTIMS. BUT stick around a while and you will see heavy implications. I'll dig up a thread from a year ago and PM it to you.
Back to our regularly scheduled topic.....;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Right on Rick!...You are correct, not every person who went into the waycorps was a nasty person...but a LOT of them became nasty people as a result of their waycorps training....and I WAS in the waycorp...during my time in residence at Emporia and Rome city, I continually had to fight within my own mind not to abandon my "laid back" personality, my tendencies to treat people kindly with gentleness and respect...and to hold onto my individuality (especially when it came to HOW I treated others)...
The waycorps trained people to feel smugly superior, to be mean spirited and to treat others disrespectfully...and that's my opinion.
Those who refused to submit to the corp's "nazi" approach to Christian service, never rose very high within the ranks of the waytree.
Edited by GrouchoMarxJrLink to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
I'll await your PM.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Bluzeman & Larry, thanks for the support.
I think the folks who accuse me of calling posters liars are taking my posts/opinions way too seriously. They must have a lot of spare time on their hands. Not that I don't. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Ain't THAT the truth! But, if it wasn't interesting and fun I surely wouldn't be spending my time here.
I think the real problem is that people have been so hurt by the things people (in the Way) have done to them that they wear their feelings on their sleeves. I understand that.
Life is too short to take much too seriously.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Dooj...Why not post it here for all to read?...
..I have noticed over a long period of time that oldiesman has a tendency to downplay the testamonies of twi victims...and to defend twi. I think he fails to understand the dynamics of "groupthink" and other psychological factors that influence a person when they become involved with a cult...
During my time with twi, I found myself doing things that I disagreed with and that I thought were wrong...why?...because when you get "swept away" by a religious cult, the tendency is to think that you must be wrong to disagree with your teachers, leaders, and those in whom you look towards for guidance...to disagree oftentimes brings feelings of guilt upon yourself...
Wierwille was a middle aged man who was held in the highest esteem and considered to be the "man of God"...his followers were young people who were seeking answers and were submissive to him and defered to his judgements...
...what I just stated is nothing new here...it's been stated before...however, there have been certain people who dismiss this line of reasoning (oldiesman) and have asserted that there are no victims because people agreed to follow Wierwille...this is a cold calculated approach to logic which does not take into account the dynamics of the situation and displays an opinion that is void of understanding human nature and the relationships between teacher and student...especially in a religious setting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
She must have her reasons. I wouldn't put her on the spot over it. When she PMs me I'll post the link to what she's referring to IF she has no objections.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
I actually have no objections to posting it here. It was one of those rare moments when I was trying to "behave." ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
BTW -- I started to read Oldiesman's posts from day one (I think). There's 148 pages of his posts. If it's going to be a lot of trouble for you Doojable don't fret it. Maybe we should just let this one die.
Edited by Larry N MooreLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Here is the thread I referred to:
Foolhardy Behaviour
There are 13 pages - some of it very difficult and painful for a few posters here - so please be respectful in responding. If anyone wants to say something mean, PM me and don't post it here (better yet, just don't say it at all.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Please don't let it die. :D
There are some oldies but goodies there. Here's one from 2002:
A poster commented:
I answered: Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Oldiesman, with all due respect -- What would be the point of continuing this discussion? No matter what I don't think anyone will change their opinion of you. Having read through about seven pages of your posts I personally think you're a very reasonable person and I found myself agreeing with much that you said. But here's the thing (and what concerned me the most) -- reliving past discussions for some people might be too much for them to handle. That's why I thought doojable originally intended on just PMing me a link to those threads -- to spare the sensibilities of those who (for whatever reason) found offense in your comments. I don't know if it's really worth it but, I'm certainly in no position to "kill" the thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Here's another oldiesman oldie but goldie original:
:D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I don't get what the controversy is.
If you call people "liars", why should anyone pretend you didn't?
If someone asks where it happened, why not just see where it happened and let it drop?
If you want to call people "liars" outright, that's your decision and your posts. Stand by your posts,
or retract them, or don't post them to begin with.
I don't see why much emotion should be connected with it.
You insinuated it lots of times, and said it outright twice (that we found), and said
someone was "full of ...." outright twice (that we found.) That's a matter of record.
I don't get the emotion or controversy at all. I certainly am not making a big deal. I just made one
post that I thought wasn't even controversial. But why deny saying it twice and twice more,
using other words outright?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.