Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2013 18:58:59 GMT -5
Face to face activism can be more effective than something like a petition......or it might not be. It will depend on the dynamics between the two parties in face to face discussions. In some cases, the petitioner will be effective, in other cases they might just harden the person they are petitioning. I think it would be a big mistake to think that one or the other is the complete answer. Both are tools which can be valuable for change.
I would disagree with Gene on anonymity for a couple of reasons. While real names are more powerful and more desirable on a petition, petitions also serve as an indicator of public sentiment like an opinion poll. If you have a lot of unique signers, then the person receiving the petition gets a sense that a lot of people care about the subject. The other thing has to do with one of the most frequent uses of online petitions: the building of a database for a multitude of potential future uses. This can be extremely valuable to build a database, which will include the email addresses of the anon petitioners.
Personally, I recommend anonymity only for those people who are known to have taken a strong anti-2x2 stand. An anon signing may be less valuable, but it is not of zero value.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Dec 18, 2013 19:06:00 GMT -5
What kind of value does "Signing a petition anonymously" have besides indicating that the person doesn't have the courage to be personally identified with this issue that they claim is morally important to them. The whole principle behind signed petitions is the proof that real people are willing to support the ideas behind it. Sorry if it offends folks --- but yes, (as I have indicated many times before) I appreciate folks who have the courage to personlly stand behind the principles they claim to stand for on this board as well. And yes, I understand that a majority of posters on this board do it under camoflauge. And in my opinion most of the excuses given - are clearly just that "excuses for the lack of courage". But, I accept that it is the way things are on this board -- My feelings on the matter are not particularly representative -- but they are my feelings. Congratulations on making this post all about you and your opinion, as opposed to its intented purpose. Very courageous! ☆Arwen☆ Arwen Give me a break. This is not about edgar as you imply, seem more about you and your agenda being busted.Perhaps your feelings are hurt Its about whats behind the curtain. Names and folks who are too timid to have their name in print for all to see.Perhaps a few excommunications for what is right and in the open would get some people off the fence one way or the other. There are a few on here who are bold enough to use their names to post.Their address and phone numbers available also Of coarse they are ex's. This would not profit much for a petetion about the horrendous things still going on the secretive 2x2 group because you know what the workers say about those bitter ex's Just my thoughts ken
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2013 19:13:45 GMT -5
Congratulations on making this post all about you and your opinion, as opposed to its intented purpose. Very courageous! ☆Arwen☆ Arwen Give me a break. This is not about edgar as you imply, seem more about you and your agenda being busted.Perhaps your feelings are hurt Its about whats behind the curtain. Names and folks who are too timid to have their name in print for all to see.Perhaps a few excommunications for what is right and in the open would get some people off the fence one way or the other. There are a few on here who are bold enough to use their names to post.Their address and phone numbers available also Of coarse they are ex's. This would not profit much for a petetion about the horrendous things still going on the secretive 2x2 group because you know what the workers say about those bitter ex's Just my thoughts ken Now what in the world are you going on about Arwen's "agenda being busted"? What "curtain" are you talking about?
|
|
|
Post by arwen89 on Dec 18, 2013 19:19:17 GMT -5
If nothing else, some of my friends and family will have followed the link to the Wings website and/or, me being ousted for caring about csa would make them see the workers in a different light. My parents own convention grounds, and my in-laws host the baptism pond lol I've done it now, for sure!
☆Arwen☆
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 18, 2013 19:29:58 GMT -5
... An anon signing may be less valuable, but it is not of zero value. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Dec 18, 2013 20:33:31 GMT -5
Face to face activism can be more effective than something like a petition......or it might not be. It will depend on the dynamics between the two parties in face to face discussions. In some cases, the petitioner will be effective, in other cases they might just harden the person they are petitioning. I think it would be a big mistake to think that one or the other is the complete answer. Both are tools which can be valuable for change. I would disagree with Gene on anonymity for a couple of reasons. While real names are more powerful and more desirable on a petition, petitions also serve as an indicator of public sentiment like an opinion poll. If you have a lot of unique signers, then the person receiving the petition gets a sense that a lot of people care about the subject. The other thing has to do with one of the most frequent uses of online petitions: the building of a database for a multitude of potential future uses. This can be extremely valuable to build a database, which will include the email addresses of the anon petitioners. Personally, I recommend anonymity only for those people who are known to have taken a strong anti-2x2 stand. An anon signing may be less valuable, but it is not of zero value. I do not understand how anyone would think people signing with a pen name anonymously is going to make a drop in the whole bucket...I mean after all is it not likely that if someone who is supposed to pay heed to this petition sees all of these anonymous names, is it not more likely that she/he will say to him/herself that someone had fun picking out all of these anonymous names! Otherwords how can we be certain that he who should read this petition and understand that a lot of people are very interested in seeing this scourge on the fellowship abolish and how to do so...it is too easy for those who have NO INTENTION of changing ways of dealing with such an issue to say, well this guy has wasted all this time sitting there trying to figure out one anonymous name after another. I'm not going to pay heed to it for it is just one or two people thinking they're going to make ripples in my big pond with all these anonymous names. Besides all those who know us workers know good and well for them to sign such a petition will net them great difficulties ahead with the workers....even to the point of being excommunicated. Any of the friends who sticks their necks out in any form or fashion AGAINST the workers and the way the workers operate and make decisions, most of those friends know they would be asking for trouble with any of the workers. So I don't think that enough professes of the fellowship are going to be strong with courage and sign such a peptition without using anonymous names which will do no good as the workers are going to say that they aren't going to pay heed to a petition with a lot of names that aren't really any people! JMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2013 21:00:42 GMT -5
Face to face activism can be more effective than something like a petition......or it might not be. It will depend on the dynamics between the two parties in face to face discussions. In some cases, the petitioner will be effective, in other cases they might just harden the person they are petitioning. I think it would be a big mistake to think that one or the other is the complete answer. Both are tools which can be valuable for change. I would disagree with Gene on anonymity for a couple of reasons. While real names are more powerful and more desirable on a petition, petitions also serve as an indicator of public sentiment like an opinion poll. If you have a lot of unique signers, then the person receiving the petition gets a sense that a lot of people care about the subject. The other thing has to do with one of the most frequent uses of online petitions: the building of a database for a multitude of potential future uses. This can be extremely valuable to build a database, which will include the email addresses of the anon petitioners. Personally, I recommend anonymity only for those people who are known to have taken a strong anti-2x2 stand. An anon signing may be less valuable, but it is not of zero value. I do not understand how anyone would think people signing with a pen name anonymously is going to make a drop in the whole bucket...I mean after all is it not likely that if someone who is supposed to pay heed to this petition sees all of these anonymous names, is it not more likely that she/he will say to him/herself that someone had fun picking out all of these anonymous names! Otherwords how can we be certain that he who should read this petition and understand that a lot of people are very interested in seeing this scourge on the fellowship abolish and how to do so...it is too easy for those who have NO INTENTION of changing ways of dealing with such an issue to say, well this guy has wasted all this time sitting there trying to figure out one anonymous name after another. I'm not going to pay heed to it for it is just one or two people thinking they're going to make ripples in my big pond with all these anonymous names. Besides all those who know us workers know good and well for them to sign such a petition will net them great difficulties ahead with the workers....even to the point of being excommunicated. Any of the friends who sticks their necks out in any form or fashion AGAINST the workers and the way the workers operate and make decisions, most of those friends know they would be asking for trouble with any of the workers. So I don't think that enough professes of the fellowship are going to be strong with courage and sign such a peptition without using anonymous names which will do no good as the workers are going to say that they aren't going to pay heed to a petition with a lot of names that aren't really any people! JMT As I mentioned, petitions are often used like polls. They are frequently presented to their target without the names, just the petition and the numbers who have signed it. Names don't mean as much as you might think. In an online petition, someone could put your name in even if you don't agree and get a nice email discussion going in your name. If I was the target, very few names would mean much to me. I would look for people I knew and might contact them but otherwise, the numbers would definitely influence me if it appeared that a lot of people were interested in the subject. If there is any trouble like you are suggesting may happen, we'll let you know from 2x2 purgatory!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 18, 2013 21:36:02 GMT -5
Congratulations on making this post all about you and your opinion, as opposed to its intented purpose. Very courageous! ☆Arwen☆ Arwen89 the issue has never been my courage or lack of it-- but rather the complete absence of moral dignity in an issue promoted by a person working under an alias, campaigning for a petition written by anonymous writers expecting anonymous signatures of people, in an attempt to give credibility to an issue that evidently even the authors are reluctant to take personal responsibility for. 2x2ism in a nutshell!!!! But a fiasco as far as moral honor, truth and openness is concerned. The issue of CSA is worth far more than this kind of compromise -- the very kind of compromise that has created the ugly problem in the first place. The 2x2 principle of 'concealing the truth whenever it may cause apparent difficulty'!!! I agree, Edgar, (not Dennis, I'm sorry I got the wrong name in there) If the person posting here, calling her/him self Arwen, would just tell us who they are, it seems it would be more honest and more likely to get responses.
The subject of CSA is too serious to work towards a solution by such an anonymous route. PS. The petition is also too long & needs more structure
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 18, 2013 22:04:18 GMT -5
The subject of CSA is too serious to work towards a solution by such an anonymous route. PS. The petition is also too long & needs more structure It is also in need of an editor. On many levels. How many have read the petition and can, without looking, list the points that the petition seeks to rectify? If you are putting yourself out there looking for change at least put your best foot forward! As far as sending out a mass email with this - If you were not leaning in this direction how far down would you read before you hit the delete key?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2013 22:16:16 GMT -5
I agree, Dennis. If the person posting here, calling her/him self Arwen, would just tell us who they are, it seems it would be more honest and more likely to get responses.
The subject of CSA is too serious to work towards a solution by such an anonymous route. PS. The petition is also too long & needs more structure
She isn't trying to hide her name tho', it's posted right at the top of the petition. I guess I don't understand why people are upset that some of us (actually it would appear most users on this site, whether "exes" or "friends") use a pseudonym here...how does that matter at all when the petition was created by someone who didn't try to hide her name at all. And everyone who has signed it, some still friends and some not, have used their real names!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2013 22:34:04 GMT -5
I agree, Dennis. If the person posting here, calling her/him self Arwen, would just tell us who they are, it seems it would be more honest and more likely to get responses.
The subject of CSA is too serious to work towards a solution by such an anonymous route. PS. The petition is also too long & needs more structure
She isn't trying to hide her name tho', it's posted right at the top of the petition. I guess I don't understand why people are upset that some of us (actually it would appear most users on this site, whether "exes" or "friends") use a pseudonym here...how does that matter at all when the petition was created by someone who didn't try to hide her name at all. And everyone who has signed it, some still friends and some not, have used their real names! Exactly. I sometimes wonder if anyone is actually reading the posts here. The petition writer is really out there with full name and more personal information than should be necessary.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Dec 18, 2013 22:43:14 GMT -5
Congratulations on making this post all about you and your opinion, as opposed to its intented purpose. Very courageous! ☆Arwen☆ Arwen Give me a break. This is not about edgar as you imply, seem more about you and your agenda being busted.Perhaps your feelings are hurt Its about whats behind the curtain. Names and folks who are too timid to have their name in print for all to see.Perhaps a few excommunications for what is right and in the open would get some people off the fence one way or the other. There are a few on here who are bold enough to use their names to post.Their address and phone numbers available also Of coarse they are ex's. This would not profit much for a petetion about the horrendous things still going on the secretive 2x2 group because you know what the workers say about those bitter ex's Just my thoughts ken For the record Ken, my agenda is to: 1. Raise awareness of CSA in the fellowship. 2. Educate friends and workers with respect to this great evil. 3. Encourage victims to come forward and get help. 4. Expose child sexual offenders so they can get help. 5. Protect the fellowship's children from further abuse. I think this would be similar to Arwen's agenda. I'm sorry that you and others are not on board.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 18, 2013 22:47:58 GMT -5
She isn't trying to hide her name tho', it's posted right at the top of the petition. I guess I don't understand why people are upset that some of us (actually it would appear most users on this site, whether "exes" or "friends") use a pseudonym here...how does that matter at all when the petition was created by someone who didn't try to hide her name at all. And everyone who has signed it, some still friends and some not, have used their real names! Exactly. I sometimes wonder if anyone is actually reading the posts here. The petition writer is really out there with full name and more personal information than should be necessary. (most users on this site, whether "exes" or "friends" use a pseudonym here..) True, but are any of us asking someone to sign a petition?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Dec 18, 2013 22:48:29 GMT -5
There are a few on here who are bold enough to use their names to post. Its too bad that principles can't be weighed and discussed without attaching a person to the comments. I believe what is written should stand on its own merits - no matter who is writing it.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 18, 2013 22:56:34 GMT -5
I started reading the petition again, and just stopped- it is way too long!
It needs a good editor.
That isn't meant to disparage the author.
However, when you write a petition, or anything else for that matter, if you want it read- make it as precise & concise as possible.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 18, 2013 22:58:38 GMT -5
Face to face activism can be more effective than something like a petition......or it might not be. It will depend on the dynamics between the two parties in face to face discussions. In some cases, the petitioner will be effective, in other cases they might just harden the person they are petitioning. I think it would be a big mistake to think that one or the other is the complete answer. Both are tools which can be valuable for change. I would disagree with Gene on anonymity for a couple of reasons. While real names are more powerful and more desirable on a petition, petitions also serve as an indicator of public sentiment like an opinion poll. If you have a lot of unique signers, then the person receiving the petition gets a sense that a lot of people care about the subject. The other thing has to do with one of the most frequent uses of online petitions: the building of a database for a multitude of potential future uses. This can be extremely valuable to build a database, which will include the email addresses of the anon petitioners. Personally, I recommend anonymity only for those people who are known to have taken a strong anti-2x2 stand. An anon signing may be less valuable, but it is not of zero value. The problem with not signing your own name is also this. The workers can say that a majority of the signers are individuals that have used many pseudonyms and that the numbers are not likely accurate because of that. People can sign more than once using a different email and name.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 18, 2013 23:27:12 GMT -5
The problem with not signing your own name is also this. The workers can say that a majority of the signers are individuals that have used many pseudonyms and that the numbers are not likely accurate because of that. People can sign more than once using a different email and name. It will not be the name count that will make the petition sink or swim. It will be the merit of the petition and the reasonableness of what is being petitioned.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 18, 2013 23:44:02 GMT -5
The problem with not signing your own name is also this. The workers can say that a majority of the signers are individuals that have used many pseudonyms and that the numbers are not likely accurate because of that. People can sign more than once using a different email and name. It will not be the name count that will make the petition sink or swim. It will be the merit of the petition and the reasonableness of what is being petitioned. No, I agree. I was responding to the person who felt that a large number signing the petition would give the workers an understanding that a lot of people were behind it and also that the more people that signed it would encourage others to sign it too. I was trying to point out that the workers could claim there weren't as many as it appeared if people could sign and be anonymous.
|
|
|
Post by arwen89 on Dec 19, 2013 1:49:32 GMT -5
Face to face activism can be more effective than something like a petition......or it might not be. It will depend on the dynamics between the two parties in face to face discussions. In some cases, the petitioner will be effective, in other cases they might just harden the person they are petitioning. I think it would be a big mistake to think that one or the other is the complete answer. Both are tools which can be valuable for change. I would disagree with Gene on anonymity for a couple of reasons. While real names are more powerful and more desirable on a petition, petitions also serve as an indicator of public sentiment like an opinion poll. If you have a lot of unique signers, then the person receiving the petition gets a sense that a lot of people care about the subject. The other thing has to do with one of the most frequent uses of online petitions: the building of a database for a multitude of potential future uses. This can be extremely valuable to build a database, which will include the email addresses of the anon petitioners. Personally, I recommend anonymity only for those people who are known to have taken a strong anti-2x2 stand. An anon signing may be less valuable, but it is not of zero value. I do not understand how anyone would think people signing with a pen name anonymously is going to make a drop in the whole bucket...I mean after all is it not likely that if someone who is supposed to pay heed to this petition sees all of these anonymous names, is it not more likely that she/he will say to him/herself that someone had fun picking out all of these anonymous names! Otherwords how can we be certain that he who should read this petition and understand that a lot of people are very interested in seeing this scourge on the fellowship abolish and how to do so...it is too easy for those who have NO INTENTION of changing ways of dealing with such an issue to say, well this guy has wasted all this time sitting there trying to figure out one anonymous name after another. I'm not going to pay heed to it for it is just one or two people thinking they're going to make ripples in my big pond with all these anonymous names. Besides all those who know us workers know good and well for them to sign such a petition will net them great difficulties ahead with the workers....even to the point of being excommunicated. Any of the friends who sticks their necks out in any form or fashion AGAINST the workers and the way the workers operate and make decisions, most of those friends know they would be asking for trouble with any of the workers. So I don't think that enough professes of the fellowship are going to be strong with courage and sign such a peptition without using anonymous names which will do no good as the workers are going to say that they aren't going to pay heed to a petition with a lot of names that aren't really any people! JMT I don't mind if I get "exed" over THIS. If it's bc I'm standing up for something good and right, then may this be my lady hurrah as a professing person. ☆Arwen☆
|
|
|
Post by arwen89 on Dec 19, 2013 1:51:15 GMT -5
I do not understand how anyone would think people signing with a pen name anonymously is going to make a drop in the whole bucket...I mean after all is it not likely that if someone who is supposed to pay heed to this petition sees all of these anonymous names, is it not more likely that she/he will say to him/herself that someone had fun picking out all of these anonymous names! Otherwords how can we be certain that he who should read this petition and understand that a lot of people are very interested in seeing this scourge on the fellowship abolish and how to do so...it is too easy for those who have NO INTENTION of changing ways of dealing with such an issue to say, well this guy has wasted all this time sitting there trying to figure out one anonymous name after another. I'm not going to pay heed to it for it is just one or two people thinking they're going to make ripples in my big pond with all these anonymous names. Besides all those who know us workers know good and well for them to sign such a petition will net them great difficulties ahead with the workers....even to the point of being excommunicated. Any of the friends who sticks their necks out in any form or fashion AGAINST the workers and the way the workers operate and make decisions, most of those friends know they would be asking for trouble with any of the workers. So I don't think that enough professes of the fellowship are going to be strong with courage and sign such a peptition without using anonymous names which will do no good as the workers are going to say that they aren't going to pay heed to a petition with a lot of names that aren't really any people! JMT As I mentioned, petitions are often used like polls. They are frequently presented to their target without the names, just the petition and the numbers who have signed it. Names don't mean as much as you might think. In an online petition, someone could put your name in even if you don't agree and get a nice email discussion going in your name. If I was the target, very few names would mean much to me. I would look for people I knew and might contact them but otherwise, the numbers would definitely influence me if it appeared that a lot of people were interested in the subject. If there is any trouble like you are suggesting may happen, we'll let you know from 2x2 purgatory! Thank you SO much, random wonderful helpful and thoughtful person, for all your encouragement and support! ♡ ☆Arwen☆
|
|
|
Post by arwen89 on Dec 19, 2013 1:54:50 GMT -5
Arwen89 the issue has never been my courage or lack of it-- but rather the complete absence of moral dignity in an issue promoted by a person working under an alias, campaigning for a petition written by anonymous writers expecting anonymous signatures of people, in an attempt to give credibility to an issue that evidently even the authors are reluctant to take personal responsibility for. 2x2ism in a nutshell!!!! But a fiasco as far as moral honor, truth and openness is concerned. The issue of CSA is worth far more than this kind of compromise -- the very kind of compromise that has created the ugly problem in the first place. The 2x2 principle of 'concealing the truth whenever it may cause apparent difficulty'!!! I agree, Edgar, (not Dennis, I'm sorry I got the wrong name in there) If the person posting here, calling her/him self Arwen, would just tell us who they are, it seems it would be more honest and more likely to get responses.
The subject of CSA is too serious to work towards a solution by such an anonymous route. PS. The petition is also too long & needs more structure
My name is Alaina Salyers. My mother and Father own the convention grounds in Clever, Missouri. I am 24. I have Brown hair and blue eyes. I will not be a part of a system that allows or covers up child abuse in any form. I also edited and shortened the petition (a little lol) just for you! ☆Arwen☆
|
|
|
Post by arwen89 on Dec 19, 2013 1:56:03 GMT -5
Exactly. I sometimes wonder if anyone is actually reading the posts here. The petition writer is really out there with full name and more personal information than should be necessary. (most users on this site, whether "exes" or "friends" use a pseudonym here..) True, but are any of us asking someone to sign a petition?
I'm not along them to sign their lives over to me. Geez. I'm asking them to show their support for an ISSUE. ☆Arwen☆
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Dec 19, 2013 1:59:47 GMT -5
Always good to see someone such as yourself taking a stand on this issue. You have been very open with your identity both on the petition and on the facebook groups that you have posted on. Thanks for taking this stand. While it might be hard for some professing folks to openly agree with you, you are helping to bring awareness of the issue out into the open from your position as a member of the church. Ultimately, any change that takes place will probably have to come from pressure from the church members. As a previous poster mentioned, your parents (as convention ground owners) probably don't even realize the liability risks for allowing a known abuser onto their grounds. It isn't the church that would be responsible, but rather your parents if something were to happen on their property. After all, the church doesn't own the property, so it is the property owner who will be held accountable. (and their insurance hopefully will cover any civil lawsuits regarding damages that occur on their property) As far as this being your "lady hurrah as a professing person", there should be more ladies hurrahing along with you...... LOL!
|
|
|
Post by arwen89 on Dec 19, 2013 2:20:56 GMT -5
Always good to see someone such as yourself taking a stand on this issue. You have been very open with your identity both on the petition and on the facebook groups that you have posted on. Thanks for taking this stand. While it might be hard for some professing folks to openly agree with you, you are helping to bring awareness of the issue out into the open from your position as a member of the church. Ultimately, any change that takes place will probably have to come from pressure from the church members. As a previous poster mentioned, your parents (as convention ground owners) probably don't even realize the liability risks for allowing a known abuser onto their grounds. It isn't the church that would be responsible, but rather your parents if something were to happen on their property. After all, the church doesn't own the property, so it is the property owner who will be held accountable. (and their insurance hopefully will cover any civil lawsuits regarding damages that occur on their property) As far as this being your "lady hurrah as a professing person", there should be more ladies hurrahing along with you...... LOL! Ha! Silly autocorrect :-P *last! ☆Arwen☆
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Dec 19, 2013 3:31:03 GMT -5
You're a brave lady Arwen. Is your last post on the previous page a kind of exit letter.
I would have hoped you would have been commended on your effort to handle this important issue, I stand in amassment at those who discredit your effort.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Dec 19, 2013 6:12:07 GMT -5
To Fixit and other critics It is not that we are not onboard to stop CSA its that we won't back into the room so nobody knows who we are. I kinda resent that you would imply that I and others are not onboard. All due respect ken
|
|
Ju
New Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by Ju on Dec 19, 2013 6:12:12 GMT -5
Thank you Arwen for your open approach. Don't listen to the critics here, if what you have done makes one more person aware and prevents the abuse of one child that would be great. I took the opportunity to share on my Facebook page.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 6:30:26 GMT -5
I agree, Edgar, (not Dennis, I'm sorry I got the wrong name in there) If the person posting here, calling her/him self Arwen, would just tell us who they are, it seems it would be more honest and more likely to get responses.
The subject of CSA is too serious to work towards a solution by such an anonymous route. PS. The petition is also too long & needs more structure
My name is Alaina Salyers. My mother and Father own the convention grounds in Clever, Missouri. I am 24. I have Brown hair and blue eyes. I will not be a part of a system that allows or covers up child abuse in any form. I also edited and shortened the petition (a little lol) just for you! ☆Arwen☆ Good for you arwen89 This is likely the kind of signature that has the chance of getting the attention of the 2x2 high councils -- a number of well known membership of good standing, with the courage to personally stand up for what they believe (in spite of the consequences) But for your sake, and the sake of the issue --- a significant number of others willing to do the same thing is important if there is to be effect. One of the dishonest sicknesses of much of the "concerned 2x2" movement is the obvious complete lack of courage to personally stand up for moral statements that need to be made. The 'alias' and 'anonymous' mindset (predominant on TMB (and Wings)) hardly lends any kind of credibility to issues that desperately need changing. Until that changes (which is rather doubtful it ever will !)-- no significant changes will be made --- And in light of that, "don't hold your breath"!!!
|
|