|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 1, 2010 10:35:23 GMT -5
I was "a bit surprised" at something you recently posted also, Lin. You stated you didn't have a message board...yet you posted this invitation awhile back... I've been a bit surprised at some of the things that have been posted on the TLC..... I'm not they used to post here. How long ago was that I posted it? I don't even remember my password to get in there. So would you say I still have one? I feel flattered you follow me that closely.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 10:41:12 GMT -5
Scott, has anyone told you about being kicked out because you have a bad spirit. Or questioning the workers you are told you need to go home and pray about it. How about being shunned by the people that go to meeting because a person is upset about something that the overseer said or did and expressed it. The overseer will make sure that you are shunned and made unwelcome. Tell most people that you are upset about something a worker did and every person will know it before the day is out. Gossip will burn the phone lines. And it won't be conversations in favor of the person that was upset about something either. And that is how a mountain is made out of a molehill. The workers will tell you what is right or wrong, even if you don't agree, and that is how you keep the flock under your control. You don't have the right to condemn a worker, that is a no no. This is not worker bashing, only what I have observed and been taught all my life. It's true that this has been the unfortunate experience of quite a few.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 10:44:55 GMT -5
Besides the "sharks in a feeding frenzy" spirit of some of these posts, which I don't think fosters productive communication, my concern is the tendency of people to quote what "someone said might have happened" as "someone said it happened"--which is what I believe What and Rational were pointing out. This just happened to me Sunday, and here's the chain of events: I saw a ring on someone's hand and said to Mom "hey, I guess they're married." My Mom (me own Mum, mind you!), went to the next person and said "my daughter says they're married." I was instantly the credible source for a fact that was only speculation. Fortunately, this was all fixed quickly and no one's reputation was smeared BUT it reminded me again of the need to be careful what and how you say things when it affects other people. If anyone has ever played Telephone, you know how quickly what you said takes on a life of it's own. It is my church and I care deeply about it, and if a worker is continually behaving in a way that is unbecoming to his place, I would like that behavior stopped as it reflects badly on all of us--we are one body. But, I would like whatever discussion takes place to be respectful and loving, a discussion that promotes healing rather than creating a deeper wound. anyone reading my posts has probably figured out that my mantra is "Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God." I gotta admit I have trouble with the "respectful and loving" bit. I personally prefer clear and direct, both on the incoming and outgoing side. I don't typically see the hurtful side of things unless someone points that out to me; maybe I have borderline autism.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 1, 2010 10:50:36 GMT -5
Sometimes constructive criticism is not what you say, but how you say. Like saying here is something I don't understand. Could you help me understand it so I can be a help? Or you could say here is what so and so is doing what are you going to do about it.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 1, 2010 11:01:40 GMT -5
I'm guessing you posted it about when you created the board...guess you can look up the date, if its important to you.
Maybe you need to start writing down your passswords, Lin... And maybe also writing down the date you create message boards, and the link to it?
And another thing: What about the CSA website you said you were going to create? That was a repeated claim you made-- about the time you discovered the WINGS website...and badly wanted it taken down, if I recall correctly...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2010 11:05:14 GMT -5
What In response to your: "I gotta admit I have trouble with the "respectful and loving" bit. I personally prefer clear and direct, both on the incoming and outgoing side. I don't typically see the hurtful side of things unless someone points that out to me; maybe I have borderline autism."
The 'clear and direct" communication you speak of is the ideal; I completely agree. I just meant that if we are going to be talking about worker behavior in another post, I'd just like to keep the negativity under control and stick to the facts--which is what I think both you and rational were trying to accomplish. I'm absolutely 100% in favor of that. What I was trying to say--and obviously didn't achieve it--is that we should discuss the problematical behavior of the workers objectively, fairly and honestly from the standpoint that we are called to help one another, not to hurt.
If you read my post as an objection to anything you posted, I apologize--that wasn't my intent.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Jul 1, 2010 11:11:07 GMT -5
Scott, has anyone told you about being kicked out because you have a bad spirit. Or questioning the workers you are told you need to go home and pray about it. How about being shunned by the people that go to meeting because a person is upset about something that the overseer said or did and expressed it. The overseer will make sure that you are shunned and made unwelcome. Tell most people that you are upset about something a worker did and every person will know it before the day is out. Gossip will burn the phone lines. And it won't be conversations in favor of the person that was upset about something either. And that is how a mountain is made out of a molehill. The workers will tell you what is right or wrong, even if you don't agree, and that is how you keep the flock under your control. You don't have the right to condemn a worker, that is a no no. This is not worker bashing, only what I have observed and been taught all my life. Yep. I've heard all those things. My point was that unless change comes from pressure within the church, there isn't going to be any change. If one person complains/asks/tells/questions a worker decision or action, then quite possibly that person is going to be squashed like a bug. However if several people of good standing in the church complain/ask/tells/questions that same worker decision or action then something might get done about it. If there are 500 adults in an area, and 1 brings up an issue that they would like corrected, then quite possibly nothing will be done. Likewise if one whole extended family brings up an issue nothing might be done. However if 50 of those 500 people bring up the same issue and nothing is done do you think that all 50 will be shunned or booted out? That would be 10% of the total and probably the loss of 2 or more meetings. It also depends on who is doing the asking and why. If you can approach an overseer with not just a problem but also with a well thought out solution then maybe there would be a change. Otherwise, voting with your feet is a good way to eventually bring about change..... There are already quite a few people that simply do not attend meetings where workers are speaking that they do not agree with in either their actions or their message. They quit going to gospel meetings altogether to show their displeasure, but continue to go to the fellowship meetings because to them that IS the church, and the IS the most important part of the church to them. When attending special meetings and conventions they simply skip those meetings where those workers are scheduled to speak. Scott
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2010 11:37:18 GMT -5
What I tried to say very ineffectually in an earlier post is best said with Prov. 12:18 "Reckless words pierce like a sword, but the tongue of the wise brings healing." (NIV) If we're going to change worker behavior, methinks reckless words are best avoided.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 11:55:05 GMT -5
And who would you suggest should hold them accountable? TLC, TTT and you? What if all religions were held accountable to their ex-members? How about ex-employees administering justice for companies? Why not let ex-wives run the divorce courts, or crime victims run the jails? Think that through and I hope you can see what a terrible idea that would be. This is why we have libel and defamation laws so that justice is administered through an impartial court system, and information is reported through an accountable, independent press. Otherwise, you'll have witch hunts and kangaroo courts. Absolutely not. TMB, TLC are but forums that might provide some information that otherwise could never be suspected-or-known by those inside-or-out of the faith. Good-and-bad. Does that mean everything disclosed is Gospel without any embellishments or prejudices? NO. Does that mean anything reported, restricted from authentication by TMB rules, are falsehood and hysteria? No. One expects that board participants, in the writing or just viewing process, have the intellectual ability 'to separate the wheat from the chaff' to enhance their lives and aid in their decision-making process. Unless, times have changed from my days, the word-of-mouth delivery method to innies (or like myself as an ex contemplating returning a few years ago) pertaining to these topics disclosed/discussed here would never crop up, because in our 'wildest of dreams we'd never envision them occurring within the Worker-ranks.' But by the inception of the internet and some that are willing to share such disclosures we may acquire additional input to aid us in our decision-making process or to protect the inner-sanctions of our home and family, whether the ramblings are good, bad, hysteria, lies, truths, ... or just plain soap-boxing blather because our mate at home ignores our nonsense. If you are attesting to the general value of having a board such as this in spite of the "hysteria, lies, truths, ... or just plain soap-boxing" then I agree. But if someone does trade in "hysteria, lies, truths, ... or just plain soap-boxing" then shouldn't people respond to that? Or just let people "act out".
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 11:56:39 GMT -5
Sometimes constructive criticism is not what you say, but how you say. Like saying here is something I don't understand. Could you help me understand it so I can be a help? Or you could say here is what so and so is doing what are you going to do about it. Good point.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 1, 2010 12:20:01 GMT -5
As I have stated often. Who are the workers? Are they somebody hired off the street? No, they are our children. They are reflections of pretty much our teaching. Can we approach them and talk to them? Yes we can. I do it often. I don't challenge but convey a true concern and care. I also get answers and not always answers I agree with,which I state. The point is the only way to address concerns is to communicate with whoever has the capability to correct the problem.
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Jul 1, 2010 12:21:52 GMT -5
All this yakking about libel and defamation was quite clearly cussed and discussed shortly before and after this board was shut down and restarted. I believe that was '07. So instead of rehashing it, go dig up those threads and carry on with all the arguments on those pertinent threads. For that matter, this board would have fewer threads if people dug up old threads that are identical to current topics.
What, autism is just a start.
Sharon, could there be a bit of paranoia? Don't answer me; just wondering if you considered it. And it's not a slam - just a question.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 1, 2010 13:29:05 GMT -5
You know I can see very plainly why the exes formulated their own TLC board....even though rat is an ex he sure hangs in tough with the innies....I remember not so very long ago, it didn't really matter what I said I was NEVER lamblasted or insinuated being a fool before...but after everybody found out I'd left the mtgs. I've had nothing but critics ever since...I'm dang tired of it! I'm a bout two apostophe's from deleting my TMB account and hope all of you get what you deserve! This is pathetic...as soon as you find out someone's left the mtgs. then it is dog attack time....no wonder the bible says to be careful less you consume one another...I'm tired of it. The ONLY time I know anybody to post "gospel truth" on TMB they usually have always given the OUTSIDE SOURCE....I have never taken anything anyone has said to be anything other then their own opinion, their own experience and I expected to be treated the same, but NO, IF YOU AN EX you will get rendered! I've had with all the self-righteous know it alls. Well, rat has taken me to task from time to time. I didn't say it was you, did I? In fact, it wasn't even your post I answered, it was Helen Reddy's. You gotta admit you say some wacky stuff sometimes, sharon. The post about older workers wanting to get married and so on, is that what they like to discuss over at the TLC? Hard to believe. Anyway, I have in the past and continue to enjoy most of your contributions here. You know, What, IF you don't think the older workers don't have to fight a continous battle against the natural urge to have a home, wife/husband so that they can have a c onstant place to hang their hat...you better rethink that...I've heard workers all my life speak about this battle and they can not let their guard down one bit, and I've heard them say often the battle is harder the older they get.....believe it or not.... And in the process of being such mobile persons they often do meet someone that catches their attentions and then you add the fact that the worker is sick, and very weary....why is so unthought of that a worker might want to marry.....there is NO wrong in that....I have been around enough workers who have gotten to the place they are NO longer able to keep going in the work and what do they get to do? They have to get stuck in some kind of "home" for the indigent workers and sadly enough they are apt to finish their life there. What is so wrong for them to want their personal love and care from someone they think a lot of? eh? what is wrong with that? Just because everybody in the fellowship has elevated the workers to a non-human status in their intellect does NOT mean the workers do not have human needs and feelings. That was the whole point of my story, believe it or not. I see nothing wrong in sharing how some poor sick worker who'd wanted a chance to just quit the going and the serving and have the constant pillow and the constant loving companion! Nothing wrong with that at all. It's too bad ALL of the workers can not have that when they get unable to go....To die so completely alone without human love of the kind God made women and men for? That's really stingy not to want that for them IF that's what they feel they need. I honestly think the workers would find themselves more exeptionally fulfilled IF they did have a wife/husband with them....true there's always going to be troubles in the flesh, but troubles comes anyway, IMO
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 1, 2010 13:37:25 GMT -5
I'm a bout two apostophe's from deleting my TMB account and hope all of you get what you deserve! This is pathetic...as soon as you find out someone's left the mtgs. then it is dog attack time....no wonder the bible says to be careful less you consume one another...I'm tired of it. Sharon I agree, it's pathetic and certainly it would be nice if the standard of Christ were more in evidence. Stay around, you're valued. S Thank you, Adm! IF I didn't love those who've pitched me off, I wouldn't still be here! I don't like being pushed down the well by so many at a time!
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 1, 2010 13:53:32 GMT -5
All this yakking about libel and defamation was quite clearly cussed and discussed shortly before and after this board was shut down and restarted. I believe that was '07. So instead of rehashing it, go dig up those threads and carry on with all the arguments on those pertinent threads. For that matter, this board would have fewer threads if people dug up old threads that are identical to current topics. What, autism is just a start. Sharon, could there be a bit of paranoia? Don't answer me; just wondering if you considered it. And it's not a slam - just a question. No...I've watched this same thing happen over and over again to those who first leave the fellowship on TMB...it becomes something like piranha time...out to draw blood or something...I'm completely amazed by it and this is one reason I have NOT deleted my account because it's repeated over and over again. Some of it is defensive mechanisms in those who are rocked by the negative....though in all honesty I did not think my story negative....Personally I find the story rich in love for the fellowship, the workership and it's not the only 2 times that such has ever happened, nor will it be the end of such as long as their are humans who go into the work and deal with other humans...there's going to be those battles to fight and/or succumb to whichever...... BTW, my story is NOT repeated from someone else's story...I saw it happen!
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 1, 2010 14:22:00 GMT -5
No...I've watched this same thing happen over and over again to those who first leave the fellowship on TMB...it becomes something like piranha time...out to draw blood or something...I'm completely amazed by it and this is one reason I have NOT deleted my account because it's repeated over and over again. I agree, it seems like some who leave are that way, out to slam and broad brush everyone else. It is pretty amazing to watch. Researchers who have studied the believability of apostate testimony have even coined terms for the phenomina, one is -> "atrocity story". It's like your own halo glows brighter when broad brushing everyone else with black paint, I suppose it does - in the confines of your own mind. The key is to not get stuck staring crosseyed at one tree thinking it's the whole forest.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 14:25:05 GMT -5
All this yakking about libel and defamation was quite clearly cussed and discussed shortly before and after this board was shut down and restarted. I believe that was '07. So instead of rehashing it, go dig up those threads and carry on with all the arguments on those pertinent threads. For that matter, this board would have fewer threads if people dug up old threads that are identical to current topics. What, autism is just a start. Sharon, could there be a bit of paranoia? Don't answer me; just wondering if you considered it. And it's not a slam - just a question. I don't think your suggestion is practical.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 14:31:28 GMT -5
Well, rat has taken me to task from time to time. I didn't say it was you, did I? In fact, it wasn't even your post I answered, it was Helen Reddy's. You gotta admit you say some wacky stuff sometimes, sharon. The post about older workers wanting to get married and so on, is that what they like to discuss over at the TLC? Hard to believe. Anyway, I have in the past and continue to enjoy most of your contributions here. You know, What, IF you don't think the older workers don't have to fight a continous battle against the natural urge to have a home, wife/husband so that they can have a c onstant place to hang their hat...you better rethink that...I've heard workers all my life speak about this battle and they can not let their guard down one bit, and I've heard them say often the battle is harder the older they get.....believe it or not.... And in the process of being such mobile persons they often do meet someone that catches their attentions and then you add the fact that the worker is sick, and very weary....why is so unthought of that a worker might want to marry.....there is NO wrong in that....I have been around enough workers who have gotten to the place they are NO longer able to keep going in the work and what do they get to do? They have to get stuck in some kind of "home" for the indigent workers and sadly enough they are apt to finish their life there. What is so wrong for them to want their personal love and care from someone they think a lot of? eh? what is wrong with that? Just because everybody in the fellowship has elevated the workers to a non-human status in their intellect does NOT mean the workers do not have human needs and feelings. That was the whole point of my story, believe it or not. I see nothing wrong in sharing how some poor sick worker who'd wanted a chance to just quit the going and the serving and have the constant pillow and the constant loving companion! Nothing wrong with that at all. It's too bad ALL of the workers can not have that when they get unable to go....To die so completely alone without human love of the kind God made women and men for? That's really stingy not to want that for them IF that's what they feel they need. I honestly think the workers would find themselves more exeptionally fulfilled IF they did have a wife/husband with them....true there's always going to be troubles in the flesh, but troubles comes anyway, IMO Got it.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 1, 2010 16:29:36 GMT -5
Rational, come on, I said it would be terrible if those parents didn't report a CSA to the police and I still stand by my opinion. If that had been what you said there would be no issue. Here is what you actually said: It is great that the young lady had courage to testify and it is sad that the others didn't. I'm still wondering why it took all those years to finally get the courage. It should have been reported by the parents of this young girl when she was eleven. Those parents failed that child immensely.The healing could have begun years ago. There was no 'if'. You did not include the 'if' until a number of posts later. You stated as fact that "Those parents failed that child immensely." One thing I found interesting was that just before you had made a post with this line: I do not want to post wrong information. It is clear that you have minimal interest in whether information is right or wrong as long as it presents your point of view. Yes you did. But you had already stated they "...failed that child immensely". The sad part was that after you found out you never mentioned a word of apology to the parents you had falsely accused. You assumed that was the case and presented your view as fact based on your erroneous and incorrect information. This is the point that I, and others, have been trying to make. You are presenting things as facts when they are nothing but rumors and hysterical suppositions. You are making up things when you do not know the facts. Let's look at what you said (again): It should have been reported by the parents of this young girl when she was eleven. Those parents failed that child immensely.The healing could have begun years ago. While you didn't state directly that you knew the parents were aware of this and did not report it, you did say they should have reported it when she was eleven. This strongly implies that you thought they knew. If they did not know how would they have been able to report it? No. I am correcting the errors and false accusations you have made. I will agree that those accusations do have the order you mentioned. You mean like you did by trying to say you said 'if' the parents knew when that was wrong? As I have said before, if I have posted something that is in error, point it out and I will support my claim or correct the post as required. In either case I will also apologize to anyone who might have been harmed/hurt by my erroneous post. Correcting errors is not a joke. In your case, you challenged me to point out errors in your posts. I did and what was your response? Nothing. When they are facts they are appropriate. As I pointed out, many times what you were posting were not facts but distortions and suppositions. Some of us like to believe what is reality, not what someone suspects is reality. I agree. It is almost like attacking someone who has corrected you and misrepresenting what you said. You are sorry for the people who question hysterical posts that are not based on facts? But the people posting the hysterical stories are to be lauded? What an interesting way to live.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 1, 2010 16:35:52 GMT -5
gz, I won't be part of any cover-ups. If you have the evidence, let me know of it and you're free to post what are verifiable facts. We've just got to abide by the standards across the net in regards to libel. But cover-ups of criminal behavior are equally unacceptable. I agree with that, but if someone is going to post "verifiable facts" who is going to do the necessary fact-checking? And it may not be criminal behaviour at issue. Just behaviour that people should know about. (Keep in mind that privacy is another consideration militating against publication in some cases). Thanks what. Whether it's the Catholics or any other denomination or fellowship, if evidence of CSA comes up, TMB will have a zero-tolerance approach. It's a criminal, pathetic act. I've seen the damage it causes to victims, often over many long years. I will do any necessary fact-checking. Let me just say, this is an issue some of us would be prepared for any consequences, even jail, if it meant protecting the life and innocence of even one child. admin
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 17:16:53 GMT -5
I agree with that, but if someone is going to post "verifiable facts" who is going to do the necessary fact-checking? And it may not be criminal behaviour at issue. Just behaviour that people should know about. (Keep in mind that privacy is another consideration militating against publication in some cases). Thanks what. Whether it's the Catholics or any other denomination or fellowship, if evidence of CSA comes up, TMB will have a zero-tolerance approach. It's a criminal, pathetic act. I've seen the damage it causes to victims, often over many long years. I will do any necessary fact-checking. Let me just say, this is an issue some of us would be prepared for any consequences, even jail, if it meant protecting the life and innocence of even one child. admin I guess my concern is with how you would handle information on a non-criminal, moral issue? In this case, the apparent worker-child situation. After all, we had an entire thread about it.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 1, 2010 17:29:50 GMT -5
I guess my concern is with how you would handle information on a non-criminal, moral issue? In this case, the apparent worker-child situation. After all, we had an entire thread about it. Thanks again what. CSA is of course in a very different category from "a non-criminal, moral issue". If there's any erring to do regarding Child Sexual Abuse, it will be on the side of protecting our children. I do agree that whispers are not good enough, and we also have a responsibility to protect any innocent who might be subject to such whispers. Fine line, I'll make the call.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 17:55:53 GMT -5
I guess my concern is with how you would handle information on a non-criminal, moral issue? In this case, the apparent worker-child situation. After all, we had an entire thread about it. Thanks again what. CSA is of course in a very different category from "a non-criminal, moral issue". If there's any erring to do regarding Child Sexual Abuse, it will be on the side of protecting our children. I do agree that whispers are not good enough, and we also have a responsibility to protect any innocent who might be subject to such whispers. Fine line, I'll make the call. Okay, but I am not asking about CSA at all. I am asking if you will allow reports on other news-worthy events like the worker-child thread. All you would have to do is take the report and then call Barry Barkley or another head worker to verify if it is true. After that you could run the report. My question is: will you be doing that?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 1, 2010 18:00:27 GMT -5
Thanks again what. CSA is of course in a very different category from "a non-criminal, moral issue". If there's any erring to do regarding Child Sexual Abuse, it will be on the side of protecting our children. I do agree that whispers are not good enough, and we also have a responsibility to protect any innocent who might be subject to such whispers. Fine line, I'll make the call. Okay, but I am not asking about CSA at all. I am asking if you will allow reports on other news-worthy events like the worker-child thread. All you would have to do is take the report and then call Barry Barkley or another head worker to verify if it is true. After that you could run the report. My question is: will you be doing that? Leaving the serious issue of CSA aside, for other matters yes, if that would help provide me the necessary evidence. I appreciate your careful advice.
|
|
|
Post by jason on Jul 1, 2010 18:16:52 GMT -5
I'm guessing you posted it about when you created the board...guess you can look up the date, if its important to you. Maybe you need to start writing down your passswords, Lin... And maybe also writing down the date you create message boards, and the link to it? And another thing: What about the CSA website you said you were going to create? That was a repeated claim you made-- about the time you discovered the WINGS website...and badly wanted it taken down, if I recall correctly... I'm guessing that Lin does not use the other message-board (i.e. he cannot remember his password there, ergo, doesn't probably log in there) and that this is a detail that is important only to you, Cherie. I also would put it to you that Lin probably does not appreciate your unsolicited advice about how to use the internet. Your remark about Lin's "repeated claims" could invite a litany from my part on your own faults over time. But what's the point? I'm hoping that few people take your moral or intellectual points to heart anymore.
|
|
|
Post by jhjmr on Jul 1, 2010 19:02:36 GMT -5
Rational, I will not go on and on with you as that is what you are trying to do. I am not into the you said, she said and whatever forever. I asked a question, I stated the way it was after it was posted. I then said that we now know how it was and that is that. I could care less if you think I know facts or not. That is not the purpose of this board. I'm not out to prove anything to anyone. I state what I know, take it or leave it. So, that is said, that is done and you are history!
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 1, 2010 19:30:09 GMT -5
As to the comment about enforced celibacy ruins good men...the stories on this post is proof alone of that. I've heard this from some men's mouth themselves...but since names are prohibited except in legal sense, I won't say who those men are. It is proof that it was the case in the very few in your sample but I gave you a number of examples where it was not true. Again, you are looking at a very limited sample and applying your conclusions to everyman. Again, this is the result of poor analytical reasoning. We hear more about the exploits of well known people because there are more people looking at them. The man sitting on his couch, working a 9-5 job may be having just as many sexual liaisons as the rich and famous - it is just that no one is writing about them. Probably nothing. No, people are assuming that is the reason without bothering to see if there is ant data at all to back up their suppositions. You are implying that celibacy causes the sexual problems that are being discussed. That would make it difficult to explain why there is a higher rate of, for example, sexual child abuse, among lay people than priests. It is rare that a priest is accused of rape. Not as uncommon outside the priesthood. You are right. I am not addressing personality conflicts, only what is factual and what is not. For example, your claims about regarding successful men having a higher sex drive is inaccurate whether you are professing or not or have a personality disorder or not. Is your idea of happiness making groundless claims against people? Would it be better for you if when you posted an error it was just allowed to stand? Of course it is not necessary. There is very little in life that is. But I have seen you belittle other people who have dared to speak up in disagreement with you and, since I do not really care what you say about me, decided to pitch in and try to sort out the myth from reality. You were not attacking a single individual, you were painting them all with a very broad brush that was filled with a paint of your own creation and which you assumed to be a universal truth. It was not. Exactly. Some do and some don't so making a blanket statement about the situation just doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 1, 2010 19:33:09 GMT -5
Rational, I will not go on and on with you as that is what you are trying to do. I am not into the you said, she said and whatever forever. I asked a question, I stated the way it was after it was posted. I then said that we now know how it was and that is that. I could care less if you think I know facts or not. That is not the purpose of this board. I'm not out to prove anything to anyone. I state what I know, take it or leave it. So, that is said, that is done and you are history! Why am I reminded of that Monty Python skit .. you know the one where the armless, legless knight continues to make threats? "Come back you coward I'll bite you to pieces."
|
|