I'll address your other points after we move on, but since this was the essence of your latest argument to me, I would really like to nail this down:
Given the points I made in my previous post to you, can I assume that you no longer think that I lack good social judgment by inviting newly-outs (and anyone else with ears to hear) to learn more about Scientology and L Ron Hubbard than Marty and the Marty-ites are ever going to allow?
Perhaps I have completely misunderstood you all along. My involvement in this discussion was based on your post about "I don't know what happened. He just shit his pants", about Marty's response to your "invitation" for people on his blog to visit ESMB.
Thus I assumed your goal there was to "sell" ESMB to any and all people reading his blog, not to make Marty shit his pants. IF your goal was to sell ESMB over there, THEN I felt you were going about it wrong.
BECAUSE to accomplish that, you have to AVOID pushing those particular buttons of Marty's so he will like and trust you or at least tolerate you because he feels you contribute something positive to HIS blog.
You would not want him to not react negatively to you, because if he gets "slappy" with you, several other people will follow his cue and jump on you. Or jump on you anyway on their own initiative if they don't like what you posted.
So if my assumption about your goal there is not correct, then any advice I have offered or any evaluation I made may well not be valid.
My evaluation of your social judgement wouldn't matter in this instance at least, because it was based on what I thought was the context. if my assumption about that was wrong, then my evaluation would be wrong.
What matters is whether or not you feel you are accomplishing your goals there or not.
I read your post as indicating surprise at an unintended result. May be it really wasn't. Maybe it was more or less in line with what you are trying to do over there. Maybe your goal is not to "sell" ESMB over there, but to provoke and challenge, present a different view or what ever you think you are doing. That's fine.
But that won't get you a license from Marty to sell ESMB over there. That ought to be common-sense. You can't sell by being challenging or antagonistic, ie, by "making wrong" the people you are trying to sell.
The thing is, good selling involves qualifying your prospects. If you're trying to sell something to people who aren't interested or are in fact antagonistic
to what you have, you have to "handle" first. In scino terms, you have to "Handle" before you can "bring to understanding"(sell) them.
That's standard sales training, not original to Hubbard. Try Zig Ziglar or any of the great sales trainers. Wheneveryoustart selling,youarelikelytorun into"objections" You have to handle every objection that comes up, before you will ever be able to "close the sale"(Get your invitations posted, or whatever).
"Qualifying your prospects" can mean different things, but in this case, many of the dominant posters over there are not interested in your "different view", and it is because of them you have to "handle". There are a lot of people who read that blog who are not doctrinaire and are open to different views, but you have to get by the guardians of the pc-ness over there to reach them. Given Marty's bad impression of ESMB, it won't be easy.
So any lack of good social judgement I may have thought I perceived refers not to the general principle of inviting people to ESMB, but to how you appeared to be trying to do it in the context of Marty's blog.
I felt you "should have known" you would get slapped for posting what you did.
I am still trying to figure out who and why Marty allows to post, even when what they post seems "non-pc" for his blog, while others hedoesn't allow or slaps. Don't have too many conclusions about it yet, just have some "feel' for it. In your case I think your name/reputation affects how he responds to you.
There are one or two posts favorable to ESMB he has allowed recently, so maybe there is hope.