Purpose of This Discussion Board ESMB

[Björkist]

This is a dramatization of Incident One.

.

That "name calling" is a dramatization of OT III Incident 2.

.

Vinaire,

Can you elaborate a little on these statements? In particular, what "this" refers to in the 1st quote.

and lol @ priapism.

 

[Dark Phoenix]

We tolerate, endure and sometimes deteriorate within ourselves for the sake of an idea and we project this onto others too. But that kind of thing you don't see happening in other forms of life, other species on this planet. We kill for an idea. The whole foundation of our cultures and civilization is built on the idea of killing and being killed, first in the name conflicting religious institutions, and in the name of political ideologies, as symbolized by the state. The whole foundation of culture is built on the idea of killing and being killed.

We don't really admit that. We say that our cultures are based on our ideas of harmony. I don?t think so. We are moving progressively in the direction of destroying everything. We somehow have tremendous faith that the thought which has helped us to create everything that you see and are very proud of will help us to change the course of events. This faith, I maintain, is misplaced. Somehow we have a faith that this instrument, thought, which has helped us to be what we are today, will help us to create a better, happier life on this planet.

You may wonder about how we get out of this, yet everything you discover is adding to the momentum of destruction. Everything, because, the drive behind that discovery is to use it for purposes of maintaining the continuity, the status quo.

Is there any possibility that the human species will figure that out in time and change course, and if it does change course, what kind of change would it be? I say the chances are slim to none. We are doomed, you see. We are lost in the jungle; we have tried every possible means of escape. But still, somehow, there is a faint hope that maybe there is some way we can get out of this jungle. But we just have to stand still and let things happen.

Philosopher and supreme pessimist Arthur Schopenhauer, would certainly agree with the idea that we are doomed: "we are the unfortunate products of our own epistemological making, and that within the world of appearances that we structure, we are fated to fight with other individuals.....the world of daily life is essentially violent and frustrating."

But the hope you speak off, however fragile, however overshadowed by the savage nature of man, is not altogether unwarranted.

Of course people are for the most part very predictable. But the thing about the human condition is that people are also very unpredictable. We can all surprise each other to some degree. When we least expect it, people can, and do, display the most amazing courage in the face of tremendous adversity; there's the unshakable strength of one's integrity despite intense pressure to compromise and even betray one's values; And there's that very crucial part of our humanity that is the wonderful response of compassion and kindness for someone in need of help.

So as base as human nature can be, one's resolution to do the right thing does sometimes win out.
________
F2001

 

[alex]

Yes, you know he is RRB. Just don't believe him when he tries to tell you how long his outpour siphon organ is. I kid, bad humor. There should be some smilies somewhere in the post but I didn't go out of my way.

So alex, hi. I am familiar with your viewpoint, perspective and understand your stance, having read many of your posts. It will be nice to see you living outside the official organization doing what you like with the subject, some day.

I didn't recognize you, in the picture that was posted last year taken at one of the first raids on the sac org, my old home and stomping grounds. I put in my 12.5 on staff there till 1990. I was familiar with, in person, about a couple hundred area scn'sts and thousands more from writing letters. I was really a no body but came in religiously for my duty.

Anyhow, just to derail the tread a little, I'm curious, I haven't been in the area for a couple years, wish I could stand with the sac anons.

But you know in the early years when I got in, mid 70's, there was the Davis mission where I started, which seemed quite populated with staff and public.

The sac org at the old 19th street location had maybe 50-60 staff, besides a fairly full academy, the internship room was bulging.

I was impressed to see that COSMOD SAC at the time was even more bustling, larger space wise, staff and public than the Org.

The Arden mission was also incredibly active with a sizable number of staff and public.

Seems like early big Events (before the Int ones) could pull maybe a good 1K, with happy excited attendees, and there were regular impromptu or planned public parties with 20++ scn'sts, throwing it down with a live band and all, ohh, I just restimulated that great hangover.

Sometime in the early '80's the Sac org (S.O. building fund) bought the 15th St. building, which was about 3-4 times larger than the 19th St one, but smaller than the COSMOD SAC mission building on 23/24th & R St., and shortly afterwards the COSMOD SAC mission merged its staff and public with the Sac org,.

Now one could say this would probably cause the org to swell with staff and public, but an odd thing had happened, it seemed just prior there had been an exodus of staff and public all over the Sac area.

Even the Arden mission downsized then disappeared. HMmm.

The Davis mission has fluxed in it's size and locations, I assume (though lacking enough info) is not that large with staff and public wise as in the hey days. A Folsom mission opened a couple years before I left the area, but had a real part time schedule from what I saw. Maybe a couple more outlying missions opened recently

By time I left staff in '90 at the Sac org, I doubt there were 30 staff and a dozen +/- students at anytime of the day or night, could have been slightly more, but compared to maybe close to 100+ active, a couple decades earlier.

I don't think all those staff and public went up lines (oh some in the SO of course) but 100's of active scn'sts gone from the area?

What would you estimate current staff and active public count to be?

That huge impressive Ideal Org building sitting there, when it opens, seems like it's going to be an echo chamber because of the emptiness.

Well I partly was making a statement, but some honest figures of the great expansion would be appreciated so I can update my personal mental image, of how it seemed and even when I went in to almost try to recover my self in '04 and saw only a dozen or so staff and public, some volunteers trying to get addresso updated....etc.

So OSA, DSA Sac, you going to pull out those (someone correct me, UNCONSTITUTIONAL) waivers I might have signed probably about not speaking out or suing the church etc, I don't remember, that under duress and fear of not getting my repayment check handed to me as it was intimidating at the end of the cycle ?

How is Val the ED, she always liked me, I think.

Brian

I've never really been much on the sac org lines, just one intensive of auditing there in the 80's (chel henderson did my grades), but one of my family did their academy levels and internship there. I dont live in Sac, although one of my kids does, I couldnt give you any reliable data on the org except that its not the bustling place it once was.....they dont even call me anymore even though orgs around the country that I have never been in do.

Last time I talked to Val was over 5 years ago....she seemed overworked and under appreciated. I cant imagine what it is like to be an ED in the current era of scientology. And I can relate to kafka.

Sacramento has always been one of the "big" scientology cities, in Sacramento's case because of the number of people who have been there and moved on to greater things....it still has a number of influential OTs.

I've been in the new ideal org building, in my opinion it could be put to use as is or with a little freshening. Its bullshit to build empty palaces, and off policy. Monuments for vainglorious leaders.

 

[alex]

I absolutely have an agenda, multiple ones in fact. I operate from them constantly. One of them is to keep the board in reasonably good humor. Another is to take on those who I believe have an unspoken agenda. Another is to expand my understanding of all things. There are others.

My issue with you is that you do not change that I can see. That means that I don't believe you are in good faith. I dont' believe you, period. No one here has a responsiblity to you or me. You seem to expect it and that opens suspicion that your real interest is not that the board improve, but that it satisfy your agenda of belief. Well phoeey on youey. Start looking for real and you may find what you want. Till then you will not, guaranteed.

My agenda is mostly me. Yes I do realize the deficiencies in that.

I see change in myself, and that is all that is really important. I have and do look "for real" and do find things of value.

You say that no one here has a responsibility to you or me, but then seem to imply that my agenda is self satisfying. Is that not assigning me some responsibility to others?

I am most certainly not working on an agenda of pleasing you! I find it amusing that you are so adamant that I am missing something or not finding something....when in reality what I seem to be missing is agreement with you!

 

[nexus100]

My agenda is mostly me. Yes I do realize the deficiencies in that.

I see change in myself, and that is all that is really important. I have and do look "for real" and do find things of value.

You say that no one here has a responsibility to you or me, but then seem to imply that my agenda is self satisfying. Is that not assigning me some responsibility to others?

I am most certainly not working on an agenda of pleasing you! I find it amusing that you are so adamant that I am missing something or not finding something....when in reality what I seem to be missing is agreement with you!

Real looking does not find value, it finds perspective.

I implied nothing, I stated. The rest of your post is the usual manipulative BS.

But it does superbly display the aegis of agenda surrounding your personna. For that proof I am grateful.

 

[_brian]

Well, OK then, alex.

With the tremendous amount of things one reads on the board, and I usually mentally note when Sac org is brought up because of my history there, and since I think you confirmed (maybe you didn't?) that picture was you, outside the Sac org, I just had an incomplete impression of your involvement with Sac. Nevermind.

But to me the drastic change of how it used to be, activity wise, and my observation was there is/was contraction, I'd have to see hard figures which I doubt I'd be welcome to wander in and around the org at anytime.

Carry on folks.

Brian

I've never really been much on the sac org lines, just one intensive of auditing there in the 80's (chel henderson did my grades), but one of my family did their academy levels and internship there. I dont live in Sac, although one of my kids does, I couldnt give you any reliable data on the org except that its not the bustling place it once was.....they dont even call me anymore even though orgs around the country that I have never been in do.

Last time I talked to Val was over 5 years ago....she seemed overworked and under appreciated. I cant imagine what it is like to be an ED in the current era of scientology. And I can relate to kafka.

Sacramento has always been one of the "big" scientology cities, in Sacramento's case because of the number of people who have been there and moved on to greater things....it still has a number of influential OTs.

I've been in the new ideal org building, in my opinion it could be put to use as is or with a little freshening. Its bullshit to build empty palaces, and off policy. Monuments for vainglorious leaders.

 

[alex]

Real looking does not find value, it finds perspective.

I implied nothing, I stated. The rest of your post is the usual manipulative BS.

But it does superbly display the aegis of agenda surrounding your personna. For that proof I am grateful.

Ah I see. If I look and find value I am wrong, I was supposed to find perspective. I am glad there is at least one person who knows what "real" looking is.

Thank you for telling me how to look and what to look for.

Why not finish the job and just tell me what to think.

(more manipulative bs from alex)

 

[alex]

Well, OK then, alex.

With the tremendous amount of things one reads on the board, and I usually mentally note when Sac org is brought up because of my history there, and since I think you confirmed (maybe you didn't?) that picture was you, outside the Sac org, I just had an incomplete impression of your involvement with Sac. Nevermind.

But to me the drastic change of how it used to be, activity wise, and my observation was there is/was contraction, I'd have to see hard figures which I doubt I'd be welcome to wander in and around the org at anytime.

Carry on folks.

Brian

Contraction would be my perception also.

Isn't it policy that the statistics be posted in publicly accessable areas? If I remember correctly, past Div 6, across from the DSA office in a little room before the hgc. With the turnover at reception, I doubt you would be challenged if you just walked in like you owned the place. Thats what I do....

 

[_brian]

Contraction would be my perception also.

Isn't it policy that the statistics be posted in publicly accessable areas? If I remember correctly, past Div 6, across from the DSA office in a little room before the hgc. With the turnover at reception, I doubt you would be challenged if you just walked in like you owned the place. Thats what I do....

Yes, DSA was down the hall from recpt.

I think it might be policy to post the organization board in a public place, I forget.

The OIC (org information center, comm baskets etc) at one time had Divisional stats posted, one (staff members, though anyone could wander in the little room back by the bathrooms at the time) could see GI, WDAH, etc. stats, maybe going back a few months worth. Maybe later they were kept in the DSA office.

I could probably almost do that, wander in say hi. It'd be interesting to see/hear HCO bring order happen once one of the veteran staff seeing me and telling the poor probably kid EO or other young staff member to get the SP DB out, I only received a PTS Type C label (currently my avatar) and it may not have been publicly posted or broadcast past the terminals that had to do with the repayment cycle.

Though I might even expect a nervous attempt at communicating with me, probably as a basics, recovery cycle, yes?

That's why, for me, with all the hype of EXPANSION, I scratch my head. Sure there are many OT's or other long time influential people in the area but it is just not the same in relation that I described earlier, and some of the old timers that are left on staff or the field have to have that in the back of their minds, but probably just thinking it's the other areas that are expanding and as soon as they get in that new building refurbished or not things are going to soar!?

OK, back to reading.

Brian

 

[CornPie]

...Another [of my agendas] is to take on those who I believe have an unspoken agenda...

Very concise -- I've never heard that phrase said before, "taking on those with an unspoken agenda".

Having an 'unspoken agenda' is one thing -- but it's spineless to continually attack (for any old reason) those who oppose it, without saying why they're really attacking. They're spineless because they know they couldn't justify their agenda if they had the courage to state it -- they'd have their lunch eaten -- they're shallow. They have a lot in common with fairgamers. Every time they look in the mirror they should say to themselves, "I am a spineless fairgamer" -- and continue to do this until they have the spine to state their agenda.

 

[nexus100]

Ah I see. If I look and find value I am wrong, I was supposed to find perspective. I am glad there is at least one person who knows what "real" looking is.

Thank you for telling me how to look and what to look for.

Why not finish the job and just tell me what to think.

(more manipulative bs from alex)

You're inaccurate, not wrong.

Everyone "knows" everything, they are either accurate in their observations or they're not.

Everyone is looking exactly at what they need to see. They just don't understand what they are seeing-till they understand it. If you want to know what to look at look at what you don't understand.

Think of being on a desert island with lots of naked women.

That should do it.

 

[lionheart]

Well, I guess it all depends on whether or not you think the crime of "keeping their religious doctrine secret" is in any way comparable to the actual crimes of the Cofs eg: human trafficking, slavery, enforced abortions, perverting the course of justice, protecting paedophiles and wife-beaters, extortion, blackmail, coercion, fraud, fair-game, enforced disconnection, denial of human rights, etc etc etc (feel free to add actual crimes to this list).

For me the important point is not so much that the religious doctrines are secret. It is common for religious movements and cults to have public, exoteric teachings and inner-members esoteric teachings. So I don't have any particular problem with the CofS doing this.

I think the key thing is the nature of the secret teachings.

In the CofS case, my opinion is that the content of and importance given to the deadly secret galactic disaster from 75 million years ago is the motivating factor for the actual crimes that you list.

The crimes you list are committed on the belief of what is the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics. The Xenu story, the implants and the BT secret teachings are what scews the judgment of what is the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics.

The events that Ron "discovered" from 75 million years ago are used by the CofS to suppress or invalidate the 1st, 2nd, 5th, 6th, & 7th dynamics and to re-define the 3rd, 4th & 8th dynamics. Ron's Journal 67 explains this as do his other briefings and subsequent policies and orders.

So one gets the abhorent manifestations in the SO and the Orgs in general that justify or excuse the real crimes that you listed.

Therefore I don't agree with your analysis that the real crimes are the only correct target. (Let me know if I've misunderstood you).

It is not a crime that the doctrines are kept secret, but the teachings themselves create the crimes and their secrecy helps to perpetuate the crimes.

In handling the criminal CofS, target the crimes, certainly, but if the cause of them (OTIII) is also targetted, then the generator of the crimes is undercut and rendered impotent.

So I see the need for a twin-pronged PR campaign against the CofS, targetting the crimes and targetting the doctrines that motivate and explain the committing of them.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

"Perfidity"? Since when was that a word? You have got to be a clam! And if a clam then nobody can trust anything you say.

Perfidy is a very common and proper word. Look it up.

There is a case to be made that people who are Scientologists are indocrinated to the extent that they only see things from a Scientological view.

But to say that nobody can trust anything a Scientologists says smacks of the same tyoe of indoctrination: They say--nobody can trust an ex-Scientologists, you say--nobody can trust a Scientologists.


The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

If I may jump in this late in the discussion, the reason you appear disengenous Alex is simply the way you argue. My experience with arguing with you tells me you are not looking to understand but to refute. If I may give an example of what I mean it is like this:

Someone says Scientology hurts people.

You say you've never seen that.

The other person gives specific, documented examples.

You reply "Scientology is a generallity."

These are not the actually words, but is meant to show what comes across. Although you did use the statement "Scientology is a generallity" to me at the end of an argument.

So you don't seem to argue or discuss in good faith, but instead you knock over the table when you start to lose the argument.

So the impression comes through when discussing something with you that you are not sincere. You are very good at pointing out to others when they do that. So I know you know what I am talking about.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[CornPie]

In response to your post #232.

I hope you don't mind that I rearranged your post:

. The Xenu/BT secret story provides the motivation for scientology's crimes.

. These crimes are committed on the belief that they are for the greatest good.

. scientology justifies and excuses these crimes, using the Xenu/BT (Body Thetan) alien story from 75 million years ago.

. It is not a crime that the this story is kept secret, but the teachings themselves create the crimes, and their secrecy helps to perpetuate the crimes.

. In handling criminal scientology, target the crimes, certainly -- but if the Xenu/BT cause of them is also targeted, (revealed at OT3 thru OT7), then the generator of the crimes is undercut and rendered impotent.

What's needed is a twin-pronged PR campaign against scientology:
1) targeting their crimes.
2) exposing the Xenu/BT secrets that motivate and justify committing them.

 

[CornPie]

...[scientology's crimes] are less in my attention than someone they have happened too. I didnt say they didnt happen, but that I had no first hand experience of them...

Alex: That was a well thought out sentence, but would you please clarify.

1) is it that you have no first hand 'experience' of scientology's crimes.
2) or that you have no credible 'knowledge' of scientology's crimes -- such as, for example, but not limited to; seen or heard from someone who may have fabricated, facilitated, participated, etc.

Come on, old buddy, spill.

 

[Gadfly]

I hope you don't mind that I rearranged your post:

. The Xenu/BT secret story provides the motivation for scientology's crimes.

. These crimes are committed on the belief that they are for the greatest good.

. scientology justifies and excuses these crimes, using the Xenu/BT (Body Thetan) alien story from 75 million years ago.

. It is not a crime that the this story is kept secret, but the teachings themselves create the crimes, and their secrecy helps to perpetuate the crimes.

. In handling criminal scientology, target the crimes, certainly -- but if the Xenu/BT cause of them is also targeted, (revealed at OT3 thru OT7), then the generator of the crimes is undercut and rendered impotent.

What's needed is a twin-pronged PR campaign against scientology:
1) targeting their crimes.
2) exposing the Xenu/BT secrets that motivate and justify committing them.

I disagree. OT III could disappear and the crimes would still continue. The crimes exist because of these stable data in LRH policies:

1) Scientology is the ONLY way out of the "trap" (ref: KSW)
2) Scientology is fighting a battle against time and evil SPs to "save the universe" for all time (ref: KSW)
3) The PTS/SP "data"
4) Scientology view that anyone against them is stopping the ultimate goal of freeing all thetans and enabling "total freedom"
5) LRH data on "never discuss, only attack"
6) LRH data on using lawsuits to overwhelm "enemies"
7) LRH data on noisy investigations
8) OSA drills and policies on lying, steering conversations, and manipulating the media
9) PR Series - getting people to agree with what the Church wants - truth matters not at all
10) SPs and critics are viewed as REAL ENEMIES to be stopped at any cost (Fair Game, no rights as normal people, able to be deprived of property, etc)

The above are each part of the Scientology indoctrination process. True Believers are created WELL before any OT III is contacted.

Yes, the crimes ARE committed due to a belief in the concept of the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics (where SCN as the 3rd dynamic takes TOP precedence), BUT OT III data has nothing to do with it.

The secrecy of the OT materials is entirely different than the secrecy of Church operations, and the secrecy of OSA shenanigans (which are also hidden from staff and public).

The "secrecy" of the OT levels is not unlike other secret societies where "upper level initiations" are kept secret and given out ONLY when the neophyte or student passes certain preperatory levels (Rosicrucians, Masons, Golden Dawn, Crowley's magick group OTO, etc). Part of it may be to create a "mystery sandwich", but also generally the members of these groups BELIEVE that the levels must be approached and passed in a correct order. This may or may not be true about Scientology.

 

[Vinaire]

Vinaire,

Can you elaborate a little on these statements? In particular, what "this" refers to in the 1st quote.

and lol @ priapism.

This is covered fully in my quickie analysis of OT III here.

Keeping Scientology Working and OTIII Evaluations

In short, my analysis states

(a) Any attempt to nullify another's viewpoint using force (such as, name calling) is a dramatization, which is exemplified in OT III Incident 2.

(b) Fixation on one's viewpoint (inordinate protection, assertion etc. of one's viewpoint) underlies (a), and it seems to parallel OT III Incident 1.

I am continuing my study of OT III procedures next, to see what comes out of it. The concept of "body thetan" puzzles me. I now look at "thetan" as the postulate of individuality. To me, a thetan is a postulate. It is not some immortal being. The postulate comes from Static (BRAHMA), which is the unmanifested and the indescribable.

Anyway, if you want to respond on this topic, please do so on the thread linked above.

.

 

[Panda Termint]

Originally Posted by Panda Termint
Well, I guess it all depends on whether or not you think the crime of "keeping their religious doctrine secret" is in any way comparable to the actual crimes of the Cofs eg: human trafficking, slavery, enforced abortions, perverting the course of justice, protecting paedophiles and wife-beaters, extortion, blackmail, coercion, fraud, fair-game, enforced disconnection, denial of human rights, etc etc etc (feel free to add actual crimes to this list).

<...snip>
Therefore I don't agree with your analysis that the real crimes are the only correct target. (Let me know if I've misunderstood you).
<...snip>

I liked what you said about the justifications of CofS.
However, I disagree that it's "Xenu and BTs" that provide that justification. Many of the crimes are committed solely on the basis of "the greatest good... etc" by people who have no knowledge of the confidential data, just their own ideas stemming from allusions to it.

To take up your invitation; if you think I'm saying the crimes I listed are the ONLY correct target then, yes, you've misunderstood me.

I'm pointing out that if one truly believes the CofS to be an evil, totalitarian cult and wishes to convince others of this view then it's probably more effective to shine the light on the things the CofS doesn't want exposed.

Whilst most would think this would be Xenu and BTs and Space Opera, that cat is already well and truly out of the bag and ranging far and wide across the internet. The cats the SO/OSA/CofS are desperately trying to keep bagged are the ones that would change public perception of scientolgy from ridicule of a "slightly whacky but well intentioned religion" to outrage about a totalitarian cult which destroys lives.

To be clear about this:
Xenu/BTs = public ridicule,
Human trafficking, slavery, enforced abortions, perverting the course of justice, protecting paedophiles and wife-beaters, extortion, blackmail, coercion, fraud, fair-game, enforced disconnection, denial of human rights, etc = public outrage.

Which one do you think is going to create the most change in public perception?

 

[Doom]

ESMB is what it is, and that's a whole lot of different things to a whole lot of different people. It's also a whole lot of different things to me as well - While ESMB has its stated purpose/purposes, I (like everyone else), been given the privilege of being here, and the freedom to "take it" and/or "preceive it" and/or utilise it, as I do.

To me, ESMB is a place where...

...one can come and be understood.

...one can come and get understanding and find truths.

...one can find people of like mind.

...one can make such good friends.

...some very special people are.

...ya can have a chat, a giggle and a laugh

...ya can get help whenever ya need it.

...the entertainment is better than tv.

...ya can just be and hang with ya mates.

...ya can provide comfort and help for those in need.

...ya can direct people to, for needed info and support.

...ya can share whatever ya want, and clean out all the heebie greebies from your closet if ya feel so inclined.

...it's "safe" and "on the money" for those on the fence looking for answers.

...you're exposed to so much stuff (whether scio related or not), that ya can't help but learn and increase your understanding.

...potentially, the "bestest" therapy is available for the taking, if and when ya want to avail yourself of it.

...potentially, anything and everything, to do with any aspect of life is there for the taking, for oneself and/or others.

To me it's all about the people and what they have to give - The people who actively participate here, and the people who can and do change their lives by lurking or by reading what's here.

ESMB has been a key factor in just so, so many getting off the fence, cutting ties with the CofS and starting over. For others, it's been the best "therapist" that one could imagine - I don't just think this, I know this.

ESMB belongs to Emma. She put it here and keeps it here (she's a good, good gul! ). At the same time though, others contributed to making it what it was, and along with newcomers, continue to contribute to making it what is - It's theirs/ours too, to that degree. Some kind of 'ownership' or 'care for', or 'concern for' when it has been such a gem for so many of us and for so many others, isn't so hard to understand, is it?

I believe it's a natural thing to want to 'protect' something which is good. ESMB will be what it will be. It will ebb and flow. The individuals who have made and make it what it is aren't the types who will be controlled or dominated, so it will always go every which way to some extent. These individuals are the types who care though, the types who feel free to communicate, and the types who are happy to be communicated to - Communication including that about ESMB itself and that which may be affecting it, shouldn't be frowned upon, nor seen as an effort to control or manipulate, IMO.

I don't believe ESMB happened by chance and/or just evolved. Emma put it there with a specific purpose in mind. That purpose was pretty unique, and couldn't have been fulfilled without some guidelines or "restrictions". Some folks got on board who understood, had similar purposes, and were happy to support her endeavour. If ESMB had every "freedom" that every other scio related message board had, then it wouldn't be what it is. Nor would it be what it is, if there weren't people on board who support its purposes.

To many of us, ESMB is not just some internet message board. It IS a 'community' full of understanding, care and love - At the same time I grant that for some, it's just a message board. To many of us exes though, it IS unique and it IS special - it has way surpassed that of a simple "message board".

Good on ya Emma Darlin' and good on all who make ESMB what it is.

Love it carms Nuff said