Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2013 15:26:36 GMT -5
Clearday -- Why was the move of victims accounts to another domain so important to you?? Making the stories accessible is what is important to me. They are now available through 2 domains, not just one. Their visibility has increased. Are suggesting that we should limit their accessibility through one domain only? Good question. I didn't realize that the content of the stories were unacceptable to me until you just informed me right now! Since you seem to know they are unacceptable to me, surely you have the reasons too!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2013 15:29:57 GMT -5
By analogy, the Christian Reformed Church denomination provides overall guidelines and staff resources to individual congregations in order to implement 'safe church' policies. But they expect each local congregation to draft guidelines that work for them, and they also have a local facillitator on abuse issues within each congregation. They expect each congregation to "own" the process and the policies.
WINGS would want the friends and workers' movement to exhibit the same kind of influence over the issue. In fact, they have to.I have a feeling that Edgar would fully support this type of approach. The foregoing is the ideal situation. However, I'm sure Edgar's comments are based on reality? We can't live with the present day reality, and neither can the friends or the workers. Yes, time for some to crap now or get off the pot!
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 22, 2013 15:30:11 GMT -5
I find the letters in bold hard to read Scott, so I've removed some formatting: (address removed) Elk Grove CA 95624-1749 July 6, 2006 Dear Staff, Included in this envelope, you will find the letter intended for the use of our staff concerning Ruben Mata and also the guidelines document which we hope can be of some assistance when future reports involving the molestation of minors are brought to us. A number of you have contributed to the content and wording of both the letter and the guidelines document and I want to thank each of you who have helped in the developing of both of these papers to their present form. You will find enclosed one letter concerning Ruben for each field. The workers in the field will use the letter according to their own discretion. The letter can be shown to any of our friends who are questioning or are troubled concerning events which have involved Ruben or anything pertaining to the handling of his case in the past or present. The friends should read the letter in the presence of the workers in the field. We would rather that the letter not be left with friends over any period of time. It is hard to say who all might read the letter if that was done. If it is read in the presence of the workers, there can be further discussion and further questions can be asked. There may be rare cases in which it may be useful to show the letter to someone who is not professing - possibly to a victim. It may be well to check with us before using it in this way. Of course, the guidelines just mentioned which apply to showing the letter to our friends would also apply if it was shown to someone who is not professing. We will ask you not to make any copies of this letter. To have one letter available in each field is certainly adequate. If we are not particularly careful with letters such as this, they can end of on an internet site for all the world to read. Also, to show this letter to people who do not need to see it may arouse concerns that they had not previously entertained. The purpose of the letter is to help those who have concerns, not to advertise a kingdom problem to those who either do not know about it or are not having a problem with it There is a copy of the "guidelines" for each worker. It will be useful for all of you to have a copy for reference now and in the future. Over time, there may be changes to the suggestions that are made in this document. That is because legislation does change from time to time and also the available agencies to which reports can be made and the resources available to help victims and violators may also alter over time. It is good to remember that the legal framework in these guidelines is in the context of California law and that there may be variations to what is outlined here in other states and countries. We have made a significant effort to ensure that the information provided both in the letter and the guidelines document is accurate and current. We hope that you will find both useful. Yours in Him Dale Shultz (address removed) Elk Grove CA 95624-1749 June 29, 2006 To Whom It May Concern: Based on the information that we now have, we know that Ruben Mata sexually molested young boys during a period of at least 20 years prior to 2000. Ruben was in the work during this time. We have been informed of a half dozen cases for which Ruben is responsible and we wouldn't know how many other cases there might be of which we have no knowledge. He inflicted this damage without his companions being aware of what was happening. One case came to the attention of a brother worker through a third party as early as 1996. This worker was inexperienced in handling this kind of problem and didn't fully realize its seriousness and magnitude. No follow up action took place. Word of another case was conveyed to sister workers but, again, they didn't follow through with any definite action that would have brought the problem out into the open. A third case carne to the attention of another sister worker, apparently in November or December of 1999. During preps, in April of 2000, this sister told a brother worker about the report that had come to her. This brother passed the information on to Dick Middleton and Ruben was faced up with his problem at convention time. Ruben voluntarily relinquished his place in the ministry at Buttonwillow convention in May of 2000. In June of 2000, Steve Peirson and Ray Bullick accompanied Ruben to the District Attorney's Office in Tulare County where Ruben admitted to the offences that had come to light up until that time. The Assistant District Attorney interviewed Ruben. Dick Middleton asked Ray Bullick to help Ruben find professional help for his problem. A little start was made with counseling in June of 2000, but Ruben withdrew from any treatment program after a few months. Ruben was restricted initially to attending only designated meetings and was asked not to attend any meetings of our people sometime in 2002. Ruben was given to understand that he would need to further pursue a treatment program in order to facilitate any consideration of him attending meetings of our people in the future. Another case surfaced within the past few months (this abuse occurred in 1999) which resulted in Ruben's behavior again being reported to the authorities. This time, the authorities chose to investigate further and Ruben was arrested on Thursday, May 18. He is being held without bail. At a hearing in mid-June, an attorney was appointed to handle Ruben's defense. We understand that his "guilty" or "not guilty" plea will be submitted at the next hearing which may take place sometime in July. Following this, the date of the actual trial will be set. We feel very sorry that one of our fellow servants has caused so much harm to so many with its ensuing suffering, confusion and pain. This type of inappropriate behavior represents a very serious betrayal of trust and we feel keenly for the victims and their families who have experienced this betrayal first hand. We are also sorry that the ministry's response to the problem was not as quick, definite and adequate as it should have been - especially with respect to what happened and didn't happen prior to May of 2000. This was not due to deliberate irresponsibility on anyone's part but can be attributed largely to the fact that those involved did not comprehend the seriousness and magnitude of what was taking place at the time and were inexperienced and uninformed regarding procedure. Nevertheless, we do wish to express our regret and offer our apology that such incidents ever happened and that the ministry's response was not as quick, definite and adequate as we know it should have been as we look back over the situation now. We have discussed this issue in our staff meeting at Mountain Ranch on Monday, May 22. We also discussed the appropriate course of action if any case involving the sexual molestation of a minor (17 years of age or younger) comes to the attention of a worker in the future. A copy of this letter will be in the hands of each pair of active workers on the California workers list. It is to be used by the workers in their fields at their own discretion but primarily to help any who may have questions or are disturbed regarding this matter. We don't want any further copies of this letter made and we want the initial copies to remain in the hands of the workers in their fields. Yours Respectfully, [signed Dale Schulz] ___________________________ Dale Schulz and the California staff
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 22, 2013 15:36:19 GMT -5
Edgar's clear and incontestable objective is to discredit the ministry. Hence, any improvement by the ministry for the better of CSA victims would only make it more difficult for Edgar. While I'm sure that Edgar doesn't wish for anyone to be a victim of CSA, the unfortunate reality is that his objective to attack the ministry makes him opposed to any positive change within it and is, therefore not in the best interests of victims. Let's see beyond the politics here and support what is in the best interests of the victims, past, present, and potential. Could it be that 2x2-haters are afraid that the church would change for the better, and so make it harder for them to condemn it?
|
|
|
Post by faune on Aug 22, 2013 19:00:17 GMT -5
Edgar's clear and incontestable objective is to discredit the ministry. Hence, any improvement by the ministry for the better of CSA victims would only make it more difficult for Edgar. While I'm sure that Edgar doesn't wish for anyone to be a victim of CSA, the unfortunate reality is that his objective to attack the ministry makes him opposed to any positive change within it and is, therefore not in the best interests of victims. Let's see beyond the politics here and support what is in the best interests of the victims, past, present, and potential. Could it be that 2x2-haters are afraid that the church would change for the better, and so make it harder for them to condemn it? Fixit ~ I don't think it's impossiblity for the church to become more transparent and proactive in dealing with some issues that were dealt with wrongly in the past? With the new awareness, I would hope for some real improvements in the way things are done from now on within the 2x2 fellowship? It seems they already had made some apparent changes in the rules of the past regarding different electronic devices allowed within the homes of friends? Back when I first professed in the 1960's, everything was taboo! That was quite a depressing reality for any teenager growing up within the fellowship back in time! However, today they seem to be lightening up with those ridiculous rules of dress and allowed entertainment within the home? Who knows what may be coming around the corner ~ maybe even the exclusiveness of the Way will eventually accept outsiders as being saved, too? For sure, all the walls that religion erects are not good for humanity and the promotion of good will within our world? If we are to spiritually grow and mature, we need to lay aside the burdensome shackles of the past and embrace the freedom and liberty offered us through a personal relationship with Christ alone, allowing the Holy Spirit to truly guide our lives for the best?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Aug 22, 2013 19:03:32 GMT -5
Edgar's clear and incontestable objective is to discredit the ministry. Hence, any improvement by the ministry for the better of CSA victims would only make it more difficult for Edgar. While I'm sure that Edgar doesn't wish for anyone to be a victim of CSA, the unfortunate reality is that his objective to attack the ministry makes him opposed to any positive change within it and is, therefore not in the best interests of victims. Let's see beyond the politics here and support what is in the best interests of the victims, past, present, and potential. Could it be that 2x2-haters are afraid that the church would change for the better, and so make it harder for them to condemn it? I would certainly hope not!! That would never be my wish for the group. I would love to see some positive changes made that makes the group more able to be transparent, speak openly about the abusers in their midst and end the shunning of family and friends when someone leaves or speaks out against the group. I never knew any of that happened when I was young. Oh, and also I would like to see the end to excommunications. So yes, I would be so happy to see the group change some of the negatives because there are many positives that would then have a better chance of surviving! I think there is a lot about the group that is worth fighting for, but as it stands right now, it does need to really look at the things that may be their demise.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Aug 22, 2013 19:10:07 GMT -5
Could it be that 2x2-haters are afraid that the church would change for the better, and so make it harder for them to condemn it? I would certainly hope not!! That would never be my wish for the group. I would love to see some positive changes made that makes the group more able to be transparent, speak openly about the abusers in their midst and end the shunning of family and friends when someone leaves or speaks out against the group. I never knew any of that happened when I was young. Oh, and also I would like to see the end to excommunications. So yes, I would be so happy to see the group change some of the negatives because there are many positives that would then have a better chance of surviving! I think there is a lot about the group that is worth fighting for, but as it stands right now, it does need to really look at the things that may be their demise. Snow ~ I just shared my own comment on this possibility within the fellowship and must admit you described very well the areas that need changing within the near future to avoid the group fading from existence altogether. Without positive changes becoming more apparent to everyone concerned, they will continue to dwindle in size and influence. However, if a different attitude is embraced towards the errors of the past and workers and overseers become more proactive in these areas, I definitely feel there is hope of renewal and growth? The ball seems to be in the workers' court in the area of change ~ hopefully, they will see the need before its too late? In addition, perhaps the friends also need to take a more active role in the fellowship and stand up for what they want to see accomplished in the future of the fellowship and not be so afraid of worker backlash?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 0:49:49 GMT -5
Clearday -- Why was the move of victims accounts to another domain so important to you?? Making the stories accessible is what is important to me. They are now available through 2 domains, not just one. Their visibility has increased. Are suggesting that we should limit their accessibility through one domain only? Be reasonable clearday -- Moving them did NOT increase their availability or accessibility --- It is no easier to link to proboards than to link them from their original location. That explanation of motive is completely ridiculous. (and very obviously untrue) The question was why you personally felt it important for these stories to removed from the wings domain -- Which they clearly had resided. You have chosen to move them FROM the Wings domain for a reason. A reason I have understood was important to you. There are links to proboards from many other locations -- so my question is not how many links there may be. My question was why you personally felt it so important to get them off the Wings domain. Which is clearly the most logical place for them -- Proboards is designed as discussion board not an information sharing site. The motives explained at an earlier stage, as I understood it, were that the negativity of these stories was the major complaint of 2x2ism about the Wings site!! Are you denying that attempting to satisfy this 2x2 complaint was the prime motive for the move? Edgar 2x2ism is famous for attempting to hide their real motives and claim a different motive than the honest one (check the Vietnam story) I suspect that is what is happening here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 2:43:36 GMT -5
Edgar's clear and incontestable objective is to discredit the ministry. Hence, any improvement by the ministry for the better of CSA victims would only make it more difficult for Edgar. While I'm sure that Edgar doesn't wish for anyone to be a victim of CSA, the unfortunate reality is that his objective to attack the ministry makes him opposed to any positive change within it and is, therefore not in the best interests of victims. Let's see beyond the politics here and support what is in the best interests of the victims, past, present, and potential. Could it be that 2x2-haters are afraid that the church would change for the better, and so make it harder for them to condemn it? I would like someone to define the difference between a 2x2 hater and someone who may be still suffering from spiritual abuse (and possibly other abuses) whilst part of the fellowship. Anyone care to try?
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Aug 23, 2013 4:35:49 GMT -5
By analogy, the Christian Reformed Church denomination provides overall guidelines and staff resources to individual congregations in order to implement 'safe church' policies. But they expect each local congregation to draft guidelines that work for them, and they also have a local facillitator on abuse issues within each congregation. They expect each congregation to "own" the process and the policies.
WINGS would want the friends and workers' movement to exhibit the same kind of influence over the issue. In fact, they have to.I have a feeling that Edgar would fully support this type of approach. The foregoing is the ideal situation. However, I'm sure Edgar's comments are based on reality? If Edgar would fully support this type of approach, then he'll get no argument from me! Up until now, he's maintained that NO worker should have any influence on WINGS.
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Aug 23, 2013 4:47:01 GMT -5
Realistically, it is the workers who have the greatest power to influence change within the ministry regarding the handling of CSA cases. Realistically, it is also the workers who have the greatest power to encourage education and open discussion about CSA amoungst the friends. Also -- quite realistic and undeniable is the fact that it is workers that are directly responsible for most of the CSA situations within the group that victims have experienced -- It is also workers that have been responsible for hidding and protecting perpetrators from taking responsibility for their crimes. Also it is the responsible workers of today that still refuse to openly acknowledge the seriousness of the issues and virtues and purpose of the different aspects of Wings policy as it has been presented in the past. Don't fool yourself -- 2x2 policy and the work clearly has been and still IS the major problem. Here's something worth criticising, Edgar. Scott has posted a letter which lends considerable weight to your description that the "prime interest is and always has been to protect the image of their 'perfect way'."Instead of lumping all workers in together and broad-brushing them all, you could focus on individual matters that actually warrant criticism. The letter that Scott quoted certainly deserves critique - maybe we could even run it through Virgo's filter system: Was it true, good, or helpful?
|
|
|
Post by holdmyhand on Aug 23, 2013 4:50:31 GMT -5
Here are some dictionary definitions of the word 'influence', is it really what WINGS wants from workers? *the effect that a person or thing has on someone's decisions, opinions, or behaviour or on the way something happens *the power to shape policy or ensure favourable treatment from someone, especially through status, contacts, or wealth: *the capacity or power of persons or things to be a compelling force on or produce effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of others: He used family influence to get the contract. *the action or process of producing effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of another or others: Her mother's influence made her stay. *Synonyms . sway, rule. See authority. impress, bias, direct, control. incite, rouse, arouse, instigate, induce, persuade. In some respects, yes, we want that kind of influence. WINGS has the ability to reach around the world to everyone. We have a website that people can go to for answers and information..... workers don't. *the effect that a person or thing has on someone's decisions, opinions, or behaviour or on the way something happens
Workers send us information that we utilize to pass on information for others. There are several letters from overseers posted on WINGS informing members of decisions and actions that they have taken. wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/*the capacity or power of persons or things to be a compelling force on or produce effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of others: He used family influence to get the contract.
Again, when you read the letters from overseers we have posted on WINGS, you will see that they have informed the members of the need to report alleged abuse to the proper authorities, so that would fit here concerning behaviors/opinions/etc of the professing folks that read on WINGS. After all, WINGS, the BTS and the TMB are where many people turn to for information regarding issues within the fellowship that they do not here in their local area. *the action or process of producing effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of another or others: Her mother's influence made her stay.
And if a worker contacts us requesting help, or provides us with information they wish to have made public, then yes... that could be seen as influencing what we might do. (We get correspondence from workers who are not in a 'position of power', but have concerns they wish to share)
So..... while the workers may not influence us in regard to how we manage or run WINGS, they ARE influencing the members of the fellowship who read on WINGS and look to it as a trusted source of information. After all, we are posting and sharing information from the 'top dogs', 'the big kahunas', the 'spiritual advisors' or whatever else you want to label the overseers as. It is only fitting that we utilize the influence of the overseers to pass on information to the members of the fellowship. Do you think this is a bad thing? I am for positive influence regardless of where it comes from and posting letters from workers and sermons that support change is great My concern is that anyone who has had a serious abuse or other problem in the fellowship knows that it is impossible for any worker to remain neutral, they may start out expressing concern and shaking their head about the situation but unless you accept the OS opinion of how it should be dealt with you quickly learn workers change in a flash to fit in with company policy, . Anyone who has experienced this will have reservations about letting workers have much influence, they are not trustworthy when the pressure is applied. I see the best influence workers can have is behind the scene mostly out of the public eye, and when they do speak publicly if it is independently like GT did and reported it on WINGS but not under the umbrella of WINGS that will have more credibility in the eyes of abused, and keep WINGS looking independent and neutral Influence can be both good and bad, abused persons mostly see the bad from workers, many OS see it as there God given responsibility to control and enforce their beliefs without questions, and their first priority is damage control, at the expense of all else, you mentioned having workers involved was like teachers working at cleaning up abuse in schools, there is a big difference in that a teacher can disagree with the principle and still keep his job. In the work you have to abide by the dictator or risk a major lifestyle change, remember Steve S I see sharing information from all sources the best way for WINGS to be helpful
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Aug 23, 2013 5:02:01 GMT -5
In some respects, yes, we want that kind of influence. WINGS has the ability to reach around the world to everyone. We have a website that people can go to for answers and information..... workers don't. *the effect that a person or thing has on someone's decisions, opinions, or behaviour or on the way something happens
Workers send us information that we utilize to pass on information for others. There are several letters from overseers posted on WINGS informing members of decisions and actions that they have taken. wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/*the capacity or power of persons or things to be a compelling force on or produce effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of others: He used family influence to get the contract.
Again, when you read the letters from overseers we have posted on WINGS, you will see that they have informed the members of the need to report alleged abuse to the proper authorities, so that would fit here concerning behaviors/opinions/etc of the professing folks that read on WINGS. After all, WINGS, the BTS and the TMB are where many people turn to for information regarding issues within the fellowship that they do not here in their local area. *the action or process of producing effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of another or others: Her mother's influence made her stay.
And if a worker contacts us requesting help, or provides us with information they wish to have made public, then yes... that could be seen as influencing what we might do. (We get correspondence from workers who are not in a 'position of power', but have concerns they wish to share)
So..... while the workers may not influence us in regard to how we manage or run WINGS, they ARE influencing the members of the fellowship who read on WINGS and look to it as a trusted source of information. After all, we are posting and sharing information from the 'top dogs', 'the big kahunas', the 'spiritual advisors' or whatever else you want to label the overseers as. It is only fitting that we utilize the influence of the overseers to pass on information to the members of the fellowship. Do you think this is a bad thing? I am for positive influence regardless of where it comes from and posting letters from workers and sermons that support change is great My concern is that anyone who has had a serious abuse or other problem in the fellowship knows that it is impossible for any worker to remain neutral, they may start out expressing concern and shaking their head about the situation but unless you accept the OS opinion of how it should be dealt with you quickly learn workers change in a flash to fit in with company policy, . Anyone who has experienced this will have reservations about letting workers have much influence, they are not trustworthy when the pressure is applied. I see the best influence workers can have is behind the scene mostly out of the public eye, and when they do speak publicly if it is independently like GT did and reported it on WINGS but not under the umbrella of WINGS that will have more credibility in the eyes of abused, and keep WINGS looking independent and neutral Influence can be both good and bad, abused persons mostly see the bad from workers, many OS see it as there God given responsibility to control and enforce their beliefs without questions, and their first priority is damage control, at the expense of all else, you mentioned having workers involved was like teachers working at cleaning up abuse in schools, there is a big difference in that a teacher can disagree with the principle and still keep his job. In the work you have to abide by the dictator or risk a major lifestyle change, remember Steve S I see sharing information from all sources the best way for WINGS to be helpful Apart from not remembering Steve S (I have no idea who he is), I agree with most of your post. What I don't agree with is broad-brushing all workers as the same. We have many, many wonderful workers who are caring shepherds with a true concern for their flock.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 5:59:01 GMT -5
By analogy, the Christian Reformed Church denomination provides overall guidelines and staff resources to individual congregations in order to implement 'safe church' policies. But they expect each local congregation to draft guidelines that work for them, and they also have a local facillitator on abuse issues within each congregation. They expect each congregation to "own" the process and the policies.
WINGS would want the friends and workers' movement to exhibit the same kind of influence over the issue. In fact, they have to.I have a feeling that Edgar would fully support this type of approach. The foregoing is the ideal situation. However, I'm sure Edgar's comments are based on reality? If Edgar would fully support this type of approach, then he'll get no argument from me! Up until now, he's maintained that NO worker should have any influence on WINGS. [/b] [/quote] Perhaps Edgar is only seeing the reality of matters? Has he been proved wrong with his views on the above point? Don't get me wrong, I think the ideal position would be that one or two workers genuinely concerned about CSA etc, become part of the WINGS team or have a great input into the group. These workers would very much have to be of a mind - children first - system second. However, the ideal world is most often not the real world. Time will prove Edgar right or wrong!
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 23, 2013 6:48:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 23, 2013 7:09:41 GMT -5
Making the stories accessible is what is important to me. They are now available through 2 domains, not just one. Their visibility has increased. Are suggesting that we should limit their accessibility through one domain only? Be reasonable clearday -- Moving them did NOT increase their availability or accessibility --- It is no easier to link to proboards than to link them from their original location. That explanation of motive is completely ridiculous. (and very obviously untrue) The question was why you personally felt it important for these stories to removed from the wings domain -- Which they clearly had resided. You have chosen to move them FROM the Wings domain for a reason. A reason I have understood was important to you. There are links to proboards from many other locations -- so my question is not how many links there may be. My question was why you personally felt it so important to get them off the Wings domain. Which is clearly the most logical place for them -- Proboards is designed as discussion board not an information sharing site. The motives explained at an earlier stage, as I understood it, were that the negativity of these stories was the major complaint of 2x2ism about the Wings site!! Are you denying that attempting to satisfy this 2x2 complaint was the prime motive for the move? Edgar 2x2ism is famous for attempting to hide their real motives and claim a different motive than the honest one (check the Vietnam story) I suspect that is what is happening here. Here's a few things 2x2ism has been doing to protect children Edgar: 1. A worker, Graham Thompson delivered a Special Meetings message that focused entirely on CSA: wingsfortruth.info/responding-to-csa/sermon-by-graham-thompson/2. A professing person summarised the main points of this sermon: wingsfortruth.info/responding-to-csa/sermon-by-graham-thompson/3. Professing people sent a CSA package to all New Zealand workers: wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/letters-to-friends-and-workers/new-zealand/4. A professing person wrote to a number of workers and friends: wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/letters-to-friends-and-workers/email-to-australians/5. Professing people wrote to 43 overseers and several elders: wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/letters-from-friends-and-workers/usa-friends-to-workers-and-elders/6. Professing people together with post-professing people have put a lot of effort into getting the website to where it is today. This is just a small sampling of efforts that 2x2ism is making for the protection of children. Yes, there is a great deal still to be done, but what do you think 2x2ism's motive was for all this effort? If 2x2ism did nothing, I suspect you would despise it for doing nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Aug 23, 2013 7:16:04 GMT -5
Aaaah, of course - Steve Schultz and the David Leitch saga. Thanks for jogging my memory, Fixit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 8:03:19 GMT -5
Making the stories accessible is what is important to me. They are now available through 2 domains, not just one. Their visibility has increased. Are suggesting that we should limit their accessibility through one domain only? Be reasonable clearday -- Moving them did NOT increase their availability or accessibility --- It is no easier to link to proboards than to link them from their original location. That explanation of motive is completely ridiculous. (and very obviously untrue) The question was why you personally felt it important for these stories to removed from the wings domain -- Which they clearly had resided. You have chosen to move them FROM the Wings domain for a reason. A reason I have understood was important to you. There are links to proboards from many other locations -- so my question is not how many links there may be. My question was why you personally felt it so important to get them off the Wings domain. Which is clearly the most logical place for them -- Proboards is designed as discussion board not an information sharing site. The motives explained at an earlier stage, as I understood it, were that the negativity of these stories was the major complaint of 2x2ism about the Wings site!! Are you denying that attempting to satisfy this 2x2 complaint was the prime motive for the move? Edgar 2x2ism is famous for attempting to hide their real motives and claim a different motive than the honest one (check the Vietnam story) I suspect that is what is happening here. We have gone over this several times Edgar, so asking over and over isn't going to get different answers. Also, attributing sneaky motives to others is usually a game of imagination. I suspect that I simply do not understand your concern with "domains". It is likely beyond my expertise level. I think that having the information available through two domains instead of one is better and more accessible, but you disagree apparently. I'll have to let you explain why one domain is better than two because at this point, I don't understand one bit of it. I feel the stories are more accessible today than a year ago. If I am wrong, then it is because I don't understand what you are talking about. I can enter two different domains and find the stories. A year ago, only one. To my simple mind, it has increased availability and visibility. I have long been in favour of the BTS becoming the primary support location for the WINGS efforts and WINGS has been moving in that direction.The BTS and the WINGS website are one and the same to me, no matter what technicality "domains" raise. The BTS is where survivors can meet, share experiences, past stories, meet professionals who care to help out and read the well written stories of survivors. It is the place for real people to interact and share experiences. That is my personal primary motive for supporting the stories to be on the BTS without limiting access from the WINGS site. Call me a liar with secret motives, that's fine with me. You asked for my personal motives and you got my primary motive. If survivor stories were actually being suppressed, then you would have something to complain about. The stories are more accessible than ever so in my opinion, so you are just blowing smoke. I have no clue as to any legitimate complaint you may have. You are probably asking the wrong person. It is not my prime motive, and never was. Furthermore, I have never received or even read a single complaint from a WINGS reader against the stories, nor do I understand how the current presentation would satisfy your alleged "major complaint of 2x2ism about the Wings site!!".
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 23, 2013 8:43:21 GMT -5
Could it be that 2x2-haters are afraid that the church would change for the better, and so make it harder for them to condemn it? I would like someone to define the difference between a 2x2 hater and someone who may be still suffering from spiritual abuse (and possibly other abuses) whilst part of the fellowship. Anyone care to try? Two sides of the same coin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 8:46:25 GMT -5
Be reasonable clearday -- Moving them did NOT increase their availability or accessibility --- It is no easier to link to proboards than to link them from their original location. That explanation of motive is completely ridiculous. (and very obviously untrue) The question was why you personally felt it important for these stories to removed from the wings domain -- Which they clearly had resided. You have chosen to move them FROM the Wings domain for a reason. A reason I have understood was important to you. There are links to proboards from many other locations -- so my question is not how many links there may be. My question was why you personally felt it so important to get them off the Wings domain. Which is clearly the most logical place for them -- Proboards is designed as discussion board not an information sharing site. The motives explained at an earlier stage, as I understood it, were that the negativity of these stories was the major complaint of 2x2ism about the Wings site!! Are you denying that attempting to satisfy this 2x2 complaint was the prime motive for the move? Edgar 2x2ism is famous for attempting to hide their real motives and claim a different motive than the honest one (check the Vietnam story) I suspect that is what is happening here. Here's a few things 2x2ism has been doing to protect children Edgar: 1. A worker, Graham Thompson delivered a Special Meetings message that focused entirely on CSA: wingsfortruth.info/responding-to-csa/sermon-by-graham-thompson/2. A professing person summarised the main points of this sermon: wingsfortruth.info/responding-to-csa/sermon-by-graham-thompson/3. Professing people sent a CSA package to all New Zealand workers: wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/letters-to-friends-and-workers/new-zealand/4. A professing person wrote to a number of workers and friends: wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/letters-to-friends-and-workers/email-to-australians/5. Professing people wrote to 43 overseers and several elders: wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/letters-from-friends-and-workers/usa-friends-to-workers-and-elders/6. Professing people together with post-professing people have put a lot of effort into getting the website to where it is today. This is just a small sampling of efforts that 2x2ism is making for the protection of children. Yes, there is a great deal still to be done, but what do you think 2x2ism's motive was for all this effort? If 2x2ism did nothing, I suspect you would despise it for doing nothing. Here is something else 2x2ism has done: professing people and workers have put together a comprehensive set of CSA Guidelines which could be used across the world to protect children. sites.google.com/site/csacodeofconduct/entire-siteSince the CSA Guidelines reside in a separate domain than WINGS and is accessible by a link from WINGS, then according to Edgar's thinking, the Guidelines are not valid and are being hidden like the survivor stories. I will leave it to Edgar to figure out a way to find something wrong with having the Guidelines on a separate domain.....I'm sure he can think of something.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 23, 2013 8:51:25 GMT -5
By analogy, the Christian Reformed Church denomination provides overall guidelines and staff resources to individual congregations in order to implement 'safe church' policies. But they expect each local congregation to draft guidelines that work for them, and they also have a local facillitator on abuse issues within each congregation. They expect each congregation to "own" the process and the policies.
WINGS would want the friends and workers' movement to exhibit the same kind of influence over the issue. In fact, they have to.I have a feeling that Edgar would fully support this type of approach. The foregoing is the ideal situation. However, I'm sure Edgar's comments are based on reality? If Edgar would fully support this type of approach, then he'll get no argument from me! Up until now, he's maintained that NO worker should have any influence on WINGS. Edgar likes to ask questions, but he generally doesn't answer when you ask him a question.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 8:57:33 GMT -5
I would like someone to define the difference between a 2x2 hater and someone who may be still suffering from spiritual abuse (and possibly other abuses) whilst part of the fellowship. Anyone care to try? Two sides of the same coin. This qualifies for the "Best Answer" prize. Something for everyone to consider. Properly viewed your coin has the potential to be a real bridge builder!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 8:59:18 GMT -5
If Edgar would fully support this type of approach, then he'll get no argument from me! Up until now, he's maintained that NO worker should have any influence on WINGS. Edgar likes to ask questions, but he generally doesn't answer when you ask him a question. Consider this. Doth not those who have suffered much abuse have many questions, but few answers? This is where the coin needs spent!
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 23, 2013 9:01:11 GMT -5
If Edgar would fully support this type of approach, then he'll get no argument from me! Up until now, he's maintained that NO worker should have any influence on WINGS. Perhaps Edgar is only seeing the reality of matters? Has he been proved wrong with his views on the above point? Don't get me wrong, I think the ideal position would be that one or two workers genuinely concerned about CSA etc, become part of the WINGS team or have a great input into the group. These workers would very much have to be of a mind - children first - system second. However, the ideal world is most often not the real world. Time will prove Edgar right or wrong! The only reality is that reality is not a constant. Things change, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. The present worker and friends reality on sexual abuse is denial, backlash and anger. People are still just getting the news. From there it can go in two directions eventually: acceptance or complete withdrawal. If it's the latter option then there is no point to an advocacy role for WINGS. If it's the former, acceptance, then there may be quite a few painful years making things right. This analysis is based on speaking with people who have been through this in another church.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 23, 2013 9:16:29 GMT -5
Edgar likes to ask questions, but he generally doesn't answer when you ask him a question. Consider this. Doth not those who have suffered much abuse have many questions, but few answers? This is where the coin needs spent! I have two questions for Edgar. professing.proboards.com/post/545970professing.proboards.com/post/545972He might be too busy, and he has no obligation to answer every post. I asked about the disclaimer because keeping the stories on the BTS site helps to signal that they are not editorial content written or endorsed by WINGS itself. There is no problem with access or ability to read the stories as Edgar keeps harping on. If he has no problem with the disclaimer then he really can't have any problem with linking to another site. The other question is an exploration of his idea that the maxim "Don't coach the expression and feelings of victims!!" applies to victim stories. I'm not sure about that, and think the point is worth discussing. I need to restate that WINGS will not edit or coach victim stories in any way.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 23, 2013 9:19:49 GMT -5
Two sides of the same coin. This qualifies for the "Best Answer" prize. Something for everyone to consider. Properly viewed your coin has the potential to be a real bridge builder! As painful as the process may be, there's hardly a person on this site who isn't fundamentally interested in building bridges.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 9:31:48 GMT -5
This qualifies for the "Best Answer" prize. Something for everyone to consider. Properly viewed your coin has the potential to be a real bridge builder! As painful as the process may be, there's hardly a person on this site who isn't fundamentally interested in building bridges. This is why understanding and reconciliation is so important and condemnation so unproductive. Everyone needs to recognise spiritual abuse and understand its long term effects. Often the "outbursts of exes" are nothing more than expressions of a healing process, rather than a 2x2 hating stance. You allude to this understanding by your remark above.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 23, 2013 9:43:23 GMT -5
As painful as the process may be, there's hardly a person on this site who isn't fundamentally interested in building bridges. This is why understanding and reconciliation is so important and (1) condemnation so unproductive. Everyone needs to recognise spiritual abuse and understand its long term effects. (2) Often the "outbursts of exes" are nothing more than expressions of a healing process, rather than a 2x2 hating stance. You allude to this understanding by your remark above. Yes, and by your first sentence, those outbursts you mention are also unproductive. If you can understand and take in the "outbursts" then you must also understand and take in the "condemnation" which has a defensive component also. In any case, neither condemnations or outbursts are ever justifiable. They are both understandable in many cases.
|
|