ESMB and The Freezone - let's have it out!

[Ladybird]

I love Mark Twain! The University of California Berkely has a huge project going on now to "produce a digital critical edition, fully annotated, of everything Mark Twain wrote." Lots of it is on line on their site and they have already published 30 volumes. I recently bought "Mark Twains Helpful Hints for Good Living; A handbook for the Damned Human Race".

http://www.marktwainproject.org/

To get this post back on topic, here are a few of my favorite Mark Twain quotes on religion:

"I cannot see how a man of any large degree of humorous perception can ever be religious - unless he purposely shuts the eyes of his mind and keeps them shut by force." Mark Twain

"I have seen several entirely sincere people who thought they were Seekers after Truth. They sought diligently, persistently,
carefully, cautiously, profoundly, with perfect honesty and nicely
adjusted judgment - until they believed that without doubt or question
they had found the Truth. That was the end of the search. The man spent
the rest of his life hunting up shingles wherewith to protect his Truth
from the weather. If he was seeking after political Truth he found it in
one or another of the hundred political gospels which govern men in the
earth; if he was seeking after the Only True Religion he found it in one
or another of the three thousand that are on the market. In any case,
when he found the Truth he sought no further; but from that day forth,
with his soldering-iron in one hand and his bludgeon in the other he
tinkered its leaks and reasoned with objectors." - Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)

"In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost
every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from
authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but
have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions
about them were not worth a brass farthing." Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)

"It is agreed, in this country, that if a man can arrange his religion so
that it perfectly satisfies his conscience, it is not incumbent on him
to care whether the arrangement is satisfactory to anyone else or not."
Mark Twain

 

[Pixie]

He however, cursed to himself, not to others. For those unfortunates he used his vast capablities as a writer. If you want to see real sarcasm from a master read his Autobiography, where he lets fly freely because he knew all would be dead by the time it was published. Twain could skin a man with a sentence.

Skining a man with a sentence??!! I like that Nexus, I would like to be able to 'skin a man with a sentence'.... now.. where's the bookstore..

 

[Mick Wenlock]

Recently I have had reason to question the easy going stance on ESMB to the Freezone.

I have read certain threads that concern me, have received a number of PMs from concerned members and visited a FZ forum and recieved an interesting "welcome".

Originally I decided that FZers were welcome here because fundamentally they are Ex Scientologists. Now I have some reasons to be concerned about this apparent "affiliation" with the FZ and a perception that ESMB is a recruiting ground for and/or a free advertising venue to a larger audience for the FZ.

I haven't made any decision regarding this as yet and I'm looking for some feedback. Please don't get hysterical about this. I'm really after some thought out responses.

I want to know what you all think.

There is a fine point here Ems. AFAIK FZers do not consider themselves to be EX Scientologists, merely ex Members of the Miscavige Wing of Scientology. There is going to be an inherent conflict. Very few ex-Scientologists have anything good to say about the subject at all - for me it is total and complete BS from start to finish - it really is not possible for me to have a discussion about the subject with any kind of a scientologist, so I avoid it.

I guess it's up to you - is this a board for ex-members of Davy's Navy or is it for EX-Scientologists, people who no longer adhere to the Hubbardian insanity?

On XSO I do try - though not always successfully I am sorry to say - to keep it neutral after all the only qualification to be on the list is to be XSO and I really do want it to be a place where all can be welcome. BUt there again I'm an optimist...

FWIW - I think you have done a great job of making this a welcoming place for all types. Maybe the FZers could have their folders like they do now - I usually don't bother to go to those areas as I am not interested. Other than that I think there has been a tad of hysteria just recently - maybe just advising people to chill out might help.

 

[Roan]

I'm back.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Once again......

The post was NOT DELETED BECAUSE IT MENTIONED THE INCIDENT WITH PIERRE.

It was deleted because of how it was worded. Had Roan just reworded the post without the invective, we wouldn't be having this ridiculous conversation.

With all due respect to Emma and Thor, the above is simply not true. That's not how it went down, that's NOT what was said. Alanzo and I respect moderation, I think what we don't accept is censorship AND being told that something was said or something happened that DID NOT HAPPEN THAT WAY.

Thor removed my post because he wanted the topic of Pierre Ethier to die. I was just newly here on the thread BEGINNING to talk about it. He didn't want me bringing up a topic that he didn't want to continue.

Here's the proof:


Quote:

Originally Posted by Roan View Post

Hey, what happened to my post?!? If some Mod. deleted it I want to why? Is the Mod. some Freezone lackey??

I'm copying all these posts I make and I WILL keep re-posting them. The title of the thread IS "..let's have it out!" fer crissakes!

Your post was deleted because it was an obvious attempt to reinvigorate an acrimonious spat that was already in dying.

If you repost it, it will be deleted again. If you continue to attempt to force it, you may be removed.

Thor

No mention was made of my tone or my language by Thor. I must in good conscience take exception to people saying that my post was removed for those reasons. It was not.

.

 

[Pixie]

Welcome back Roan!! Glad to see you survived!!

 

[acertainratio]

No mention was made of my tone or my language by Thor. I must in good conscience take exception to people saying that my post was removed for those reasons. It was not.

.

Welcome back.

You should never have been banned.

 

[Pixie]

I'm back.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



With all due respect to Emma and Thor, the above is simply not true. That's not how it went down, that's NOT what was said. Alanzo and I respect moderation, I think what we don't accept is censorship AND being told that something was said or something happened that DID NOT HAPPEN THAT WAY.

Thor removed my post because he wanted the topic of Pierre Ethier to die. I was just newly here on the thread BEGINNING to talk about it. He didn't want me bringing up a topic that he didn't want to continue.

Here's the proof:


Quote:


No mention was made of my tone or my language by Thor. I must in good conscience take exception to people saying that my post was removed for those reasons. It was not.

.

Exactly!

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

There is a fine point here Ems. AFAIK FZers do not consider themselves to be EX Scientologists, merely ex Members of the Miscavige Wing of Scientology. There is going to be an inherent conflict. Very few ex-Scientologists have anything good to say about the subject at all - for me it is total and complete BS from start to finish - it really is not possible for me to have a discussion about the subject with any kind of a scientologist, so I avoid it.

OK, here's a question for you. By making these statements you're implying that you know something that people like myself who believe we've had gains from the Tech don't know (as if we did, we'd agree with you that it was BS)..

Care to enlighten us as to what that is? Presumably you've seen people come out of an auditing session after having blown a bunch of charge / having had a cognition etc. and looking a deal better than they went in, even if you've not had that experience yourself. And yet you believe it's a load of rubbish.

I am open to your arguments on this one. What I won't do though is simply take your word for it.

 

[Axiom142]

I don’t want to take sides here or throw more fuel onto the fire. But, here are my views:

At the risk of appearing to try and ingratiate myself [With an Aussie? Not bloody likely, I’m still smarting from the drubbing the England cricket team got in the Ashes and that was 18 months ago!], I am very grateful to Emma for creating this forum. If there weren’t places like this, I dread to think where I might be now.

And, since Emma created this place (for us remember), I think that she has the right to set the rules. The way I see it, if you are visiting a country, then you have to accept that they may have laws that you don’t like. If it really upsets you that much, you don’t have to visit that country.

I’m not big on censorship either, but I accept that there may be a need for it. One of the things that attracted me to this place was the fact that participants could express differing views without being shouted down or coming under vicious personal attack. If that means active moderation, then so be it. If you have rules, then it implies that you need referees. You might not agree with their decision but if someone has volunteered their time in order to provide a service for us, then we should at least respect their authority. If you disagree, then perhaps a quiet, private word might work better than shouting it from the rooftops?

In any case, I firmly believe that if someone has a strong argument, then they don’t need to resort to petty name-calling and personal attacks. I don’t think that any sensible person expects any discussion to be ‘nice’, especially one involving Scientology, but it doesn’t have to be nasty either. Surely it is perfectly possible for intelligent adults to disagree in a civil fashion?

I am most definitely not having a go at any individuals here or trying to make anyone wrong, so please don’t interpret this as such. But, I believe that the best way to get your point across is to do it in a constructive way, perhaps with a side order of good-natured humour. If you ‘win’ an argument by bullying or cowing your opponent, have you really won anything?

There are many intelligent people here, with a diversity of thought-provoking and challenging viewpoints. I can’t think of many other places where we could all have the chance to discuss Scientology. Certainly not in the CoS. And remember, the members here are not the only audience.

Thank you for your patience, I’ll get off my soapbox now.

Axiom142

 

[Terril park]

Allright... Pierre Ethier posted a success story...

In the Sinister ScamCult of Scientology we had to write up success stories.. And we had to give our 'OK to publish' on it..

Are the freezone continuing this time honoured practice?

I always ask for permission, or get a blanket permission for future
statements.

 

[Smitty]

comment to Cat's Squirrel

OK, here's a question for you. By making these statements you're implying that you know something that people like myself who believe we've had gains from the Tech don't know (as if we did, we'd agree with you that it was BS)..

Care to enlighten us as to what that is? Presumably you've seen people come out of an auditing session after having blown a bunch of charge / having had a cognition etc. and looking a deal better than they went in, even if you've not had that experience yourself. And yet you believe it's a load of rubbish.

I am open to your arguments on this one. What I won't do though is simply take your word for it.

CS, I am not answering for Mick, but I ask you if those folks who exhibit the phenomena you describe after session measurably improve in life. One can have a euphoric feeling after a shot of rum, but that person's life is not a whit better. The measurable result is what matters. If Mick has never observed any, then from his perspective, scientology auditing is not helpful.
Smitty

 

[Mick Wenlock]

OK, here's a question for you. By making these statements you're implying that you know something that people like myself who believe we've had gains from the Tech don't know (as if we did, we'd agree with you that it was BS)..

apparently I know the difference between post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy and you do not.

Care to enlighten us as to what that is? Presumably you've seen people come out of an auditing session after having blown a bunch of charge / having had a cognition etc. and looking a deal better than they went in, even if you've not had that experience yourself. And yet you believe it's a load of rubbish.

I have seen people who have come out of fights looking like that. Doesn't mean that I would recommend it as a "therapy"

What you fail to do is to prove there is a connection between the philosophy known as scientology and the fact that you feel better going in to a closed room and telling someone secret or not known things about yourself.

The "blowing charge" is just smoke and mirrors.

It IS a load of rubbish.

Show me a product - just one. Show me an OT, dammit show me a Clear!

Oh, whoops. No results - all talk, all wow no meat.

It's crap. Pure and simple.

I am open to your arguments on this one. What I won't do though is simply take your word for it.

I was not asking you to take my word for anything, I really dont care what you think or believe.

You apparently believe in Scientology - that says it all.

 

[acertainratio]

I’m not big on censorship either, but I accept that there may be a need for it. One of the things that attracted me to this place was the fact that participants could express differing views without being shouted down or coming under vicious personal attack. If that means active moderation, then so be it. If you have rules, then it implies that you need referees. You might not agree with their decision but if someone has volunteered their time in order to provide a service for us, then we should at least respect their authority. If you disagree, then perhaps a quiet, private word might work better than shouting it from the rooftops?

The person who was shouted down was Roan.

He made a point in a forceful way.

Why is that a problem to you?

If you find the normal rough and tumble of debate too much for you, maybe you should go elsewhere.

Maybe join the quilting list.

A person with any backbone does not respect authority when they believe it to be wrong in it's actions.

"You might not agree with their decision but if someone has volunteered their time in order to provide a service for us, then we should at least respect their authority."

That's pretty close to being the most idiotic statement I've ever heard.

Transplant it to Zimbabwe, and see how well it floats...

Let's respect the crooked cop who frames the young black guy because he doesn't like blacks.

So here is my advice to you:

Question authority.

Observe and test authority.

If it is just, tolerate it.

If not, fuck it.

Oh sorry - I swore.

Did that give you a headache?

Go on - ban me.

I'm a Troll and quite enjoy it.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

His post was not just about the Freezone. That's not the only thing or person to which he made reference.

 

[Pixie]

The person who was shouted down was Roan.

He made a point in a forceful way.

Why is that a problem to you?

If you find the normal rough and tumble of debate too much for you, maybe you should go elsewhere.

Maybe join the quilting list.

A person with any backbone does not respect authority when they believe it to be wrong in it's actions.

"You might not agree with their decision but if someone has volunteered their time in order to provide a service for us, then we should at least respect their authority."

That's pretty close to being the most idiotic statement I've ever heard.

Transplant it to Zimbabwe, and see how well it floats...

Let's respect the crooked cop who frames the young black guy because he doesn't like blacks.

So here is my advice to you:

Question authority.

Observe and test authority.

If it is just, tolerate it.

If not, fuck it.

Oh sorry - I swore.

Did that give you a headache?

Go on - ban me.

I'm a Troll and quite enjoy it.

Excellent points made here, I'll almost not need to be posting anymore, acertainratio is saying it all for me..

 

[Alanzo]

I don’t want to take sides here or throw more fuel onto the fire. But, here are my views:

At the risk of appearing to try and ingratiate myself [With an Aussie? Not bloody likely, I’m still smarting from the drubbing the England cricket team got in the Ashes and that was 18 months ago!], I am very grateful to Emma for creating this forum. If there weren’t places like this, I dread to think where I might be now.

And, since Emma created this place (for us remember), I think that she has the right to set the rules. The way I see it, if you are visiting a country, then you have to accept that they may have laws that you don’t like. If it really upsets you that much, you don’t have to visit that country.

I’m not big on censorship either, but I accept that there may be a need for it. One of the things that attracted me to this place was the fact that participants could express differing views without being shouted down or coming under vicious personal attack. If that means active moderation, then so be it. If you have rules, then it implies that you need referees. You might not agree with their decision but if someone has volunteered their time in order to provide a service for us, then we should at least respect their authority. If you disagree, then perhaps a quiet, private word might work better than shouting it from the rooftops?

In any case, I firmly believe that if someone has a strong argument, then they don’t need to resort to petty name-calling and personal attacks. I don’t think that any sensible person expects any discussion to be ‘nice’, especially one involving Scientology, but it doesn’t have to be nasty either. Surely it is perfectly possible for intelligent adults to disagree in a civil fashion?

I am most definitely not having a go at any individuals here or trying to make anyone wrong, so please don’t interpret this as such. But, I believe that the best way to get your point across is to do it in a constructive way, perhaps with a side order of good-natured humour. If you ‘win’ an argument by bullying or cowing your opponent, have you really won anything?

There are many intelligent people here, with a diversity of thought-provoking and challenging viewpoints. I can’t think of many other places where we could all have the chance to discuss Scientology. Certainly not in the CoS. And remember, the members here are not the only audience.

Thank you for your patience, I’ll get off my soapbox now.

Axiom142

Very well put, Axiom. Your writing is clear and your arguments are strong. I very much respect that.

I will seriously consider what you say.

 

[Axiom142]

At last, someone is taking notice of me! Thank goodness, I thought I was invisible.

The person who was shouted down was Roan.

He made a point in a forceful way.

Why is that a problem to you? :

It isn’t, I don’t think that I said it was.

If you find the normal rough and tumble of debate too much for you, maybe you should go elsewhere.

I don’t. As I said before I enjoy a good debate. But, I think better results are obtained by being civil and respecting others. That’s my opinion, I don’t expect everyone to agree.

A person with any backbone does not respect authority when they believe it to be wrong in it's actions.

With all due respect, I think you are confusing respect with agreement. If the referee has just ruled out one of my goals for offside and I know that I wasn’t, I’d be pretty annoyed. But, I wouldn’t stage a sit-down protest in the centre circle until he reversed his decision. I would accept his decision and continue playing. That is part of the price for wanting to participate in the game. Might not be ‘fair’, but so what? Just get on with the game and enjoy it.

That's pretty close to being the most idiotic statement I've ever heard.

Only pretty close. I’m disappointed, I must try harder.

Methinks you are exaggerating a tad.

Let's respect the crooked cop who frames the young black guy because he doesn't like blacks.

Sorry, can’t see how that is germane. Never said anyone should respect a rascist. Remember that I was talking specifically about this message board and someone who is giving their time for our benefit.

So here is my advice to you:

Question authority.

Observe and test authority.

Does that mean we have to always try to undermine authority? I hope I grew out of that when I turned 14.

If it is just, tolerate it.

No respect then? Ever?

If not, fuck it.

Oh sorry - I swore.

Did that give you a headache?

Why would that give me a headache? You should hear me just after I have sent my 2nd consecutive drive into the woods on the golf course. Talk about turning the air blue!

Go on - ban me.

Why would I want to ban you?


Anyway, thanks acertainratio for taking the trouble to reply to my post. I would hate to think that no one was taking any notice of me. I really do appreciate the opportunity for discussions like these.

Have to go now, have to get up early tomorrow.

Axiom142

 

[acertainratio]

At last, someone is taking notice of me! Thank goodness, I thought I was invisible.



It isn’t, I don’t think that I said it was.



I don’t. As I said before I enjoy a good debate. But, I think better results are obtained by being civil and respecting others. That’s my opinion, I don’t expect everyone to agree.





With all due respect, I think you are confusing respect with agreement. If the referee has just ruled out one of my goals for offside and I know that I wasn’t, I’d be pretty annoyed. But, I wouldn’t stage a sit-down protest in the centre circle until he reversed his decision. I would accept his decision and continue playing. That is part of the price for wanting to participate in the game. Might not be ‘fair’, but so what? Just get on with the game and enjoy it.





Only pretty close. I’m disappointed, I must try harder.

Methinks you are exaggerating a tad.





Sorry, can’t see how that is germane. Never said anyone should respect a rascist. Remember that I was talking specifically about this message board and someone who is giving their time for our benefit.





Does that mean we have to always try to undermine authority? I hope I grew out of that when I turned 14.




No respect then? Ever?




Why would that give me a headache? You should hear me just after I have sent my 2nd consecutive drive into the woods on the golf course. Talk about turning the air blue!





Why would I want to ban you?


Anyway, thanks acertainratio for taking the trouble to reply to my post. I would hate to think that no one was taking any notice of me. I really do appreciate the opportunity for discussions like these.

Have to go now, have to get up early tomorrow.

Axiom142

he he - that'a all fair enough - most of what I said was just piss taking anyway, but Scientology is a dirty subject - a little world where people get their lives and families wrecked, and some people have died before their time. Because of that from time to time people will be in a dark place and conventional 'niceness' will not suffice for some people as a mode of expression.


For you, wherever you are in the process, it works and that's ok.

Just realise that people who are in a darker place have rights too, and let them have their say in a way that works for them.

Now go forth and multiply.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

apparently I know the difference between post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy and you do not.

Is that so? Care to enlighten us further?

I have seen people who have come out of fights looking like that. Doesn't mean that I would recommend it as a "therapy".

You must have seen different fights than I have, or had different fights than I've been in.

There is no serious comparison between that and auditing.

The "blowing charge" is just smoke and mirrors.

Sorry, bald statements do not arguments make.

It IS a load of rubbish.

Damn right. You're on a roll here, aren't you? Yet another bald statement with no supporting data.

Show me a product - just one. Show me an OT, dammit show me a Clear!

OT I agree about. Clears; by Pilot's definition of "able to confront the force in mental image pictures", I believe they do exist.

Oh, whoops. No results - all talk, all wow no meat.

The wow starts now....

It's crap. Pure and simple.

Must change my underpants in that case....

What you fail to do is to prove there is a connection between the philosophy known as scientology and the fact that you feel better going in to a closed room and telling someone secret or not known things about yourself.

OK, I'll get serious for a moment.

If that was all that happened, you'd have a point. But you're also digging out things about yourself previously unknown even to yourself (or at least things you haven't known for a long time), and making connections between those and other known parts of yourself. It's called "SCIentology" (from "scio") for a reason.

Also, if you don't think blowing charge is a useful index of efficacy in auditing.counselling etc., would you care to suggest an alternative and better one?

I was not asking you to take my word for anything, I really don't care what you think or believe.

Just as well, because you're very light on either arguments or data here.

You apparently believe in Scientology - that says it all.

Yeah, it does. That statement says a lot about you too - the intentional vagueness of your sneer was a conscious or unconscious attempt to introvert me.

Not taking the bait, sorry.

 

[acertainratio]

Is that so? Care to enlighten us further?
You must have seen different fights than I have, or had different fights than I've been in.
.

If you've never been in a combat situation, you're not likely to understand what a buzz it is. You'd definitely have a floating TA afterwards.

Near death experiences can become very addictive too. I used to enjoy them and seek them out.

I once jumped off a fast moving express train just for a laugh.

Used to have massive punchups with my mates too just for a laugh.

So yes, fighting can and does produce vgi's and prob. a floating TA, but it's far from therapeutic.

Believe me, I know.