AC 79

[johniam]

I wasn't at AC '79, but I saw the film twice; once at Emporia and once at a local setting. VP seemed to be in fine rhythm. I can see why they used that film at root locations. I'm glad they left out the part with the camera man tirade.

Waysider. TRY to put yourself in my shoes for once. I was in twi for 18 years. I benefitted from it. I still prefer to fellowship with people who do it basically the same way. I'm not afraid to go to churches. I regularly go to fellowships and get blessed. Then I come here and it's the same robotic whining and such.

Linda is right. I DO have issues with twi. I like being able to express my issues with twi here like everybody else. You say it's usually my posting tactics that draw criticism, but there would be no "posting tactics" without the POSTS. No! You're splitting hairs here. You and some others attack ME. The way you do that attacks everything that comes from me: posts, tactics, and everything else. Some of you are so partisan that you can't even admit that twi ever did anything right. I don't think you're fooling too many people. "Tactics, not opinions." Yeah, right.

[WordWolf]

When I find that I'm going to react emotionally to a post,

I find it useful to log off and come back to it later, possibly even the next day.

That's why people who accuse me of making emotional posts are shown to be silly

when I just use logic in a reply.

If you'd done that here, you would have found something you don't normally see-

a post from me defending you.

I was going to post (as soon as I had a chance, which was now) that you'd been

quite civil on this thread and opine that criticism on this thread was, at the

least, impolite and uncalled-for on that basis. I was also going to point out

that we were veering off-topic.

Sadly, in replying, you displayed a bit of what you sometimes get criticized for,

while denying you do it.

I wasn't at AC '79, but I saw the film twice; once at Emporia and once at a local setting. VP seemed to be in fine rhythm. I can see why they used that film at root locations. I'm glad they left out the part with the camera man tirade.

Waysider. TRY to put yourself in my shoes for once. I was in twi for 18 years. I benefitted from it. I still prefer to fellowship with people who do it basically the same way. I'm not afraid to go to churches. I regularly go to fellowships and get blessed. Then I come here and it's the same robotic whining and such.

If you'd left it at that, you'd have been better off. (Actually, the last sentence was a

shot and you didn't need to make it. Most of the people you think of as your harshest critics

wouldn't deny that some people benefitted from time in twi. I've said, a number of times, that

I'm glad I got in, and glad I got out.

Linda is right. I DO have issues with twi. I like being able to express my issues with twi here like everybody else. You say it's usually my posting tactics that draw criticism, but there would be no "posting tactics" without the POSTS. No! You're splitting hairs here. You and some others attack ME. The way you do that attacks everything that comes from me: posts, tactics, and everything else. Some of you are so partisan that you can't even admit that twi ever did anything right. I don't think you're fooling too many people. "Tactics, not opinions." Yeah, right.

If you'd refrained from getting personal, you would have demonstrated an ability

to rise above it, to post in a more mature fashion, and even show up your critics

by posting more maturely than that did. Instead, you chose to post just as

emotionally, and then go a step further. This is a "good thing" if you're trying

to "one up" each other with a harsher post. If you're trying to claim you're being

criticized unfairly and say you're being mis-characterized as posting poorly,

then this was definitely the wrong way to respond- you just proved a point.

I've just given you and some others something to think about. I think they will

think about it- I hope you do, too.

Your opinions early in this POST were eminently acceptable, but your "tactics",

your posting style, later in this same post demonstrated what you get criticized for.

[geisha779]

I have to agree. It's not (usually) his opinions that come under fire, it's his posting tactics. (ie: straw man arguments, red herrings, blatant topic changes and diversions in general.)

edit: and now we've spun into a meta-discussion. (a discussion of the discussion, itself)

I have seen you and Ham hijack more than one thread with a long series of silly and unrelated posts. I can count the minutes until the requisite unrelated Beatles or old blues song is posted and no thread is complete without a vaguely related cartoon or two from you. It is never long after Johniam posts that you don't follow with some kind of shallow critique on his methods and reference to what ever fallacy you can find or build into his post. It is almost guaranteed you will be the next post. Are those your tactics to take a thread off course?

Why don't you engage him on the contents of his posts or just let them stand? They are incredibly effective in exposing what TWI theology produces in a persons life in regard to faith and Godliness.

Edited March 27, 2012 by geisha779

[GeorgeStGeorge]

I wasn't at AC '79, but I saw the film twice; once at Emporia and once at a local setting. VP seemed to be in fine rhythm. I can see why they used that film at root locations. I'm glad they left out the part with the camera man tirade.

You must have seen an edited version. I saw the rant on at least three separate occasions, not including the live class, itself. Your version was probably better. Vic was going on and on about how "his" people had to be the best. Okay, fine. But several minutes into it, it got a bit ironic.

George

[hiway29]

The rant on Joe C#@lter, was one of the low points of the 'class'. Not only was it uncomfortable to sit through, but it was all to familiar behavior from 'leaders' to 'subordinates' . At least it made clear where these junior G men learned it from. I recall talk afterwards that sounded almost like they enjoyed it. Like it was a wonderful example of the need to be the best for His highest and all that, and what an example doc was to not compromise the standard and so on and so forth. I'm sure there are psychological reasons why we subjected ourselves to people yelling at us, and ripping a new one, for the various 'crimes' like not setting a chair right, etc. After all this time, I still wonder at the zoo that outfit was.

[OldSkool]

Joe works hard to model himself in the image of the current president of the way. He was a yelling machine under Craig only to turn into Mr. southern hospitality mild mannered dude under Rozilla's reign of boredom.

[excathedra]

oh damn it -- always trying to follow threads and then losing my train....

johny yam is ok by me -- been here forever like me -- and always respectful as long as i can remember, but i don't have a memory yuk yuk yam :)

I always thought that screaming and bitching about trivial stuff like that was evidence of a lack of self control rather than deep spirituality.

oh no it's about spiritual anger and pressure. just ask vince finnegan and a few other asseeeholes

i do have to agree (i'm sorry) about some of the ham and waysider back and forth when people are really trying to say something. it's about respect

but i'm sure i've broken the rule myself

[chockfull]

Waysider. TRY to put yourself in my shoes for once. I was in twi for 18 years. I benefitted from it. I still prefer to fellowship with people who do it basically the same way. I'm not afraid to go to churches. I regularly go to fellowships and get blessed. Then I come here and it's the same robotic whining and such.

I think your viewpoint challenges many around here. Why? Because all of us struggle with the same things - we were in twi for as long and longer than you, we obviously drew some benefit out of it. Yet we also feel a need to expose the evil in twi for service to others and to make sense of our own past. Those are not simple things. Most around here do not fellowship with people who do it basically the same way. That would be very conflicting for the majority. I disagree with your "robotic whining" comment. I do think people jump on a bandwagon quickly around here, but in many ways the thought process we go through when doing that helps uncover and expose another layer of BS that we see w/r to twi and functioning evil. Or at least all that stuff I am attributing to the group I feel and think.

Linda is right. I DO have issues with twi. I like being able to express my issues with twi here like everybody else. You say it's usually my posting tactics that draw criticism, but there would be no "posting tactics" without the POSTS. No! You're splitting hairs here. You and some others attack ME. The way you do that attacks everything that comes from me: posts, tactics, and everything else. Some of you are so partisan that you can't even admit that twi ever did anything right. I don't think you're fooling too many people. "Tactics, not opinions." Yeah, right.

I'm sure I am at this juncture more partisan towards anti way content. I can accept that criticism. However, I feel it is an adequate and healthy balance compared to the past decades where I was blind and pro twi. You don't bother me with your viewpoints including any pro twi slant. I do try to answer you and challenge you with thought-through content and comments if I disagree. I think we can all do that.

[Rejoice]

The rant on Joe C#@lter, was one of the low points of the 'class'. Not only was it uncomfortable to sit through, but it was all to familiar behavior from 'leaders' to 'subordinates' . At least it made clear where these junior G men learned it from. I recall talk afterwards that sounded almost like they enjoyed it. Like it was a wonderful example of the need to be the best for His highest and all that, and what an example doc was to not compromise the standard and so on and so forth. I'm sure there are psychological reasons why we subjected ourselves to people yelling at us, and ripping a new one, for the various 'crimes' like not setting a chair right, etc. After all this time, I still wonder at the zoo that outfit was.

Joe works hard to model himself in the image of the current president of the way. He was a yelling machine under Craig only to turn into Mr. southern hospitality mild mannered dude under Rozilla's reign of boredom.

Sounds like Stockholm Syndrome...

[excathedra]

joe is still in the f

u

c

k

i

n

g

way????

[johniam]

quote:

I'm sure I am at this juncture more partisan towards anti way content. I can accept that criticism. However, I feel it is an adequate and healthy balance compared to the past decades where I was blind and pro twi. You don't bother me with your viewpoints including any pro twi slant. I do try to answer you and challenge you with thought-through content and comments if I disagree. I think we can all do that.

Sometimes I think of this place as a sort of impromtu think tank.

Joe Coulter's been around forever. He was the one who told LCM about Donnie Fugit at U of Kansas wasn't he? I really don't remember seeing that in the AC film, but I got yelled at every so often by twi people, and by teachers as far back as elementary school. Most of the time didn't like it. Made my attitude worse.

[WordWolf]

(snip)

I really don't remember seeing that in the AC film, but I got yelled at every so often by twi people, and by teachers as far back as elementary school. Most of the time didn't like it. Made my attitude worse.

Some people seem to confuse reality with television, movies, etc.

Twi leaders seem to do that quite a bit- we discussed recently how ROCKY- a piece of FICTION-

was very instructive as to how believing works (movies are SCRIPTED, our lives are really improv.)

Television and movies are far more DRAMATIC than reality. So-called "reality" TV is heavily edited

to give us the most dramatic incidents in a week or more, and are usually set up to invite more

conflict than reality (like finding people who are unlikely to be willing to put up with each

other and putting them together in a house. Obviously, SOMETHING will happen.)

When Melrose Place (the original) started, I LIKED it because it was similar to reality. However,

the show didn't get ratings, so they made it a wild soap opera and people kept getting thrown

into the swimming pool. People don't USUALLY like to watch reality without drama.

"Why didn't the character do the sensible thing?" "If they did, the episode would be over fast."

That's across genres- I've said things like that with sitcoms, dramas, science fiction, etc.

----------------------------------------------------

Tying that back to the discussion...

If someone actually lacks a background in something, they may be foolish or uneducated enough

to think they can "fake it" or that "it's easy" and they can just use what they saw on television

and in movies. (The television show "Mythbusters" has pointed out that the laws of physics don't

work like in movies, people are even less likely to act that way.)

So, they think that the military is all about blind obedience and yelling at the troops, and

Psychology is solving a problem within a 1/2 hour episode with no lasting effects, and they

really think they understand it all.

This seriously undervalues the HARD WORK of UNDERSTANDING both PEOPLE and PROGRAMS..

The military isn't even about a lot of yelling in BOOT CAMP- when most of the yelling takes place.

It's also not about BLIND OBEDIENCE. Soldiers who are blindly obedient get killed easily when an

order makes no sense.

That having been said, I had at least one teacher in grade school who relied on yelling. She was

least-respected of all the teachers I had in grade school. I've worked with people who supervised

and yelled, and they were respected the LEAST, and those who never yelled were respected the MOST

because they respected the people they weren't yelling at. Yelling is not how you MANAGE people.

It's most effective when ALL you need to do is get their attention. Thus, a soldier was yelled

at when he was pointing a LOADED RIFLE at people, and children get yelled at when they're about

to do something DANGEROUS to them. Most of the time, yelling is unnecessary, and doesn't help.

It can lower the respect the yeller gets, or just anger the people they're expecting to have

work with them. If that's true, the people will only do what they're REQUIRED TO DO and only

what you're watching directly, and they will leave when they can. Companies lose good workers

like that, and officers "accidentally" get hurt or killed if nobody gets them to tone it down.

If you're working with children and can't do things without yelling, then they move you away

from children, generally.

When it came to twi and yelling, at the top, it was a LACK OF DISCIPLINE, a lack of SELF-CONTROL,

that caused them to yell. Leaders who can't control THEMSELVES have no business trying to

control OTHERS- they can't lead THEMSELVES. If leaders are unqualified (as it says in the Bible)

if they can't manage a FAMILY, how can they possibly be competent if they can't manage SELF?

[DogLover]

When it came to twi and yelling, at the top, it was a LACK OF DISCIPLINE, a lack of SELF-CONTROL,

that caused them to yell. Leaders who can't control THEMSELVES have no business trying to

control OTHERS- they can't lead THEMSELVES. If leaders are unqualified (as it says in the Bible)

if they can't manage a FAMILY, how can they possibly be competent if they can't manage SELF?

Well said!! J*m F and J*m D**r, this describes you to a T.

[Steve Lortz]

Good post, WordWolf!

I received my original leadership training in the U.S. Navy submarine service.

While I was in The Way, I just assumed that the top leadership understood how to lead. I didn't spend enough time at a root location, apart from in-rez training, to see how awful TWI leadership actually was in daily practice.

After the Passing of A Patriarch was read, I kept expecting the Trustees to "take aggressive action to combat the casualty", as we would have said in the Navy. They did NOTHING!

They dithered and lied and tried to palm the responsibility for the problems onto the lax standards of people running classes on the field.

The scales fell from my eyes. I realized that Martindale, in terms of leadership, was an empty suit. I realized Wierwille had NEVER trained anyone to lead. Only to be yes-men and yes-women.

All their comparisons of The Way to a military organization, including their use of the word "corps", became an affront to the true dignity earned by those who have submitted themselves to genuine military discipline, and who have genuinely led.

This is from Military Requirements for Petty Officer 3 & 2:

"Essentially, three elements constitute effective naval leadership:

1. Adherence to moral principles;

2. Good personal example; and

3. Administrative ability."

The leadership of TWI failed on ALL counts!

Love,

Steve

[OldSkool]

3. Administrative ability."

I dunno, there were some good office secretaries...

They usually call themselves Region Coordinators and President's Cabinet.

[Jim]

Getting back to the original question, yes, VPW did say that he walked around the gym/auditorium casting out devil spirits. I don't remember him saying he went down every row and isle. He did say that he wondered what kind of season the team had had, because of the spirit of depression he discerned.

Good post, WordWolf!

I received my original leadership training in the U.S. Navy submarine service.

While I was in The Way, I just assumed that the top leadership understood how to lead. I didn't spend enough time at a root location, apart from in-rez training, to see how awful TWI leadership actually was in daily practice.

After the Passing of A Patriarch was read, I kept expecting the Trustees to "take aggressive action to combat the casualty", as we would have said in the Navy. They did NOTHING!

They dithered and lied and tried to palm the responsibility for the problems onto the lax standards of people running classes on the field.

The scales fell from my eyes. I realized that Martindale, in terms of leadership, was an empty suit. I realized Wierwille had NEVER trained anyone to lead. Only to be yes-men and yes-women.

All their comparisons of The Way to a military organization, including their use of the word "corps", became an affront to the true dignity earned by those who have submitted themselves to genuine military discipline, and who have genuinely led.

This is from Military Requirements for Petty Officer 3 & 2:

"Essentially, three elements constitute effective naval leadership:

1. Adherence to moral principles;

2. Good personal example; and

3. Administrative ability."

The leadership of TWI failed on ALL counts!

Love,

Steve

Thanks for the leadership quote, Steve. It's going up on the whiteboard in my office.

I've often wanted to do a thread on the difference between the military and TWI. VPW liked military metaphors, but it was clear to someone who had been in both environments that he didn't have a clue.

[excathedra]

good post jim

i don't think he had a clue about athletics or military

i do remember in residence we had to do some strange crap because of the corps leaders he picked

running in place in the cold dark middle of night in the mud

leader yelled "hit your backs" i think and one girl started hitting her back, but i think it meant to drop down on your back

i'm not sure yet after frikking30plusyears how that helped help people :)

[johniam]

When I think of leadership, I can't help but think of John Lennon. He wasn't as good a guitar player as George (George taught him how to play the guitar beyond basic chords), and he wasn't as good a singer/songwriter as Paul, but without his leadership, the Beatles don't happen (as we know them). I'll give 2 examples of his leadership:

1) When the Beatles first met and called themselves the Quarrymen, 1957 or so, John had already taken an art elective in grammar school. He was adamant that they consider themselves as "serious artists". Today the word 'artist' is casually thrown around, but back then you didn't call yourself an artist unless you were DiVinci, Monet, Michaelangelo, Bach, Beethoven, or somebody like that. A bunch of teens in a skiffle band? Really? Yet John was very serious about this and it had to have shaped what eventually became the Beatles.

2) After they signed their first contract with EMI they had a chance to come to the USA roughly one year before they actually did. You'd think a bunch of early 20s British guys would love to come here at that or any time, but John Lennon said no. His reasoning was that every British band who came to the USA without ever having a #1 single IN the USA was never heard from again. He wouldn't budge. Then finally 'I wanna hold your hand' got to #1 in the billboard top 100 in January of '64 and the rest.....

VP had that kind of leadership. Bud Morgan was already a pro. He wouldn't have promoted twi comparing VP to Bill Russell and Al Oerter if he'd felt coerced. In the fellowship I attend there are 3 guys who were in the military. Never been yelled at by any of them and they have nothing to say about VP except that I guess John Sommerville thought the way corps were wimps and told VP that. That might explain the running in place in the mud. I bet football players even at the high school level have had to do that.

VPs leadership inspired just too many people from too many different backgrounds to just be a "fraud".

[excathedra]

thanks for that history about john and beatles = i didn't know that

as far as vp being a good leader because of inspiring people -- and not being a fraud -- doesn't make sense to me

[waysider]

VPs leadership inspired just too many people from too many different backgrounds to just be a "fraud".

.............................................

I suppose one might make the same argument for Benito Mussolini.

"In the years following his creation of the Fascist ideology, Mussolini influenced, or achieved admiration from, a wide variety of political figures"

SOURCE

Edited April 3, 2012 by waysider

[Ham]

fair assessment..

[johniam]

Yeah, but Mussolini didn't get anybody born again. Hitler inspired people too, but, the twi spinoffs are biblical, not sex clubs. VP may have been a fraud, morally, although he hinted at that repeatedly, but his biblical teachings are still thriving.

[Ham]

Mussolini's extreme right wing rantings are "thriving" as well..

it's just a thought.

along with Hitler's rantings about how the "bad people" are the cause of Germany's (or the world's) problems..

I'm a *product* of da vicster's organization. Am I born again? More likely.. the truth of the matter is I'm going to hell..

at least I'm honest about it.. an honest devil..

[Ham]

I prefer to think of the situation..

the vicster was a hapless, degenerate, sex and Drambuie crazed moron, who just happened to be in the right place, at the right time..

[Ham]

but, the twi spinoffs are biblical, not sex clubs.

How much are you willing to bet here?