It's time to get off the fence

[Carmel]

I'm confused. Are you now saying it is time to get back on the fence? Surely you, and therefore the board (as your creation) had an agenda when you wrote the first post? And now it doesn't? What's changed? Personally I think everyone has an agenda. Its human nature. We do things for a reason. I have an agenda. Currently its to be contrarian (in case you didn't notice). Perhaps you meant that the board doesn't have any affiliations. Perhaps not. I'm not that fussed, but I am confused as to the change between the two quoted posts.

Neo

I don't understand where you are coming from.

To me, Emma's op on this thread, was her opinion regarding one's stance on Scn. A year on (after her thread got derailed), she is now talking about the purpose of ESMB, because it was addressed. Yet, somehow you are lumping the two posts together, when it's more than apparent that she is talking about two different things from two different perspectives/positions.

Is it fun being contrarian? Personally, I don't get how anyone could benefit from that agenda.

 

[Neo]

I don't understand where you are coming from.

To me, Emma's op on this thread, was her opinion regarding one's stance on Scn. A year on (after her thread got derailed), she is now talking about the purpose of ESMB, because it was addressed. Yet, somehow you are lumping the two posts together, when it's more than apparent that she is talking about two different things from two different perspectives/positions.

Is it fun being contrarian? Personally, I don't get how anyone could benefit from that agenda.

I was asking Emma a question because I have a genuine concern as to the statement "ESMB is not an activist board". Which is a completely different statement than "ESMB is more than an activist board". I went on Today Tonight out of a spirit of activism. Emma set it up for me to do it. What has changed? Did I risk my neck for nothing? Why is me asking these questions a cause of concern to people? This is as much my community as it is yours.

And I feel the need to be contrarian, not out of fun (but thank you for the snide comment) but as stated above, out of a genuine concern. Yours is not the only point of view on this board Carmel. If you learnt to take other view points then maybe you would get how people can benefit from being different. Or at least see where they are coming from.

Neo

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Aren't we overanalyzing this? - I'm an 'activist' (I could be more active though..). I consider any ex scientologist who's speaking up an 'activist', against the cult policies that commanded us to STFU.

Hmm.. So WWP is more of an 'activist board', in this fight. Ie: The aim is much more confrontional and picket planning is primary.

But we've had lots of activity like on WWP here.. No problems with it that I ever saw..

 

[Neo]

Aren't we overanalyzing this? -
-snip-

Yes, that is quite possible. Although there are attitudes that haven't been expressed publicly. I was speaking more to those. I'll drop it.

Neo

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Snip .... It's good to see you posting on ESMB again Neo!


snip ....

PS, for those who are new and don't know Neo - it might be worth pointing out that he almost single-handedly has done more than most to destroy the Scn-constructed fence.

^^^^^^ that.

 

[Alanzo]

I was asking Emma a question because I have a genuine concern as to the statement "ESMB is not an activist board". Which is a completely different statement than "ESMB is more than an activist board". I went on Today Tonight out of a spirit of activism. Emma set it up for me to do it. What has changed? Did I risk my neck for nothing? Why is me asking these questions a cause of concern to people? This is as much my community as it is yours.

And I feel the need to be contrarian, not out of fun (but thank you for the snide comment) but as stated above, out of a genuine concern. Yours is not the only point of view on this board Carmel. If you learnt to take other view points then maybe you would get how people can benefit from being different. Or at least see where they are coming from.

Neo

I have tons of respect for you and what you've done.

Thank you.

I'm glad you're here.

We need you very much.

Please keep communicating.

There needs to be more Neo in the world, not less.

 

[lionheart]

Aren't we overanalyzing this? - I'm an 'activist' (I could be more active though..). I consider any ex scientologist who's speaking up an 'activist', against the cult policies that commanded us to STFU.

Hmm.. So WWP is more of an 'activist board', in this fight. Ie: The aim is much more confrontional and picket planning is primary.

But we've had lots of activity like on WWP here.. No problems with it that I ever saw..

I have tons of respect for you and what you've done.

Thank you.

I'm glad you're here.

We need you very much.

Please keep communicating.

There needs to be more Neo in the world, not less.

The problem, that I see is that on ESMB, at times "activism" has been critically discredited and even ridiculed.

Some so-called "activists" have been silenced or driven away. This is a shame. The word "Activism" has even been used by some ESMBers as an insult.

Hubbard tried to teach us that criticism of Scn = hatred = fighting old w/track fights = SP.

This of course is just mind-bending b****cks. But it is a hard habit to drop, it is so ingrained in us by Ron's cult-control.

Of course ESMB is an "activist" board! From the cult-think any vocal critic is an "activist" and should be "destroyed utterly".

Emma is an "activist" for creating and maintaining ESMB. Schwimm is an "activist" for being a critic. So too critics like Alanzo, and TAJ, and Carmel for her activities in getting Scns out of the cult. So too Fluffy and Terril. Going to the Media or reporting facts to Governments are also all "Suppressive Activism Acts". Hooray!

The act of posting any message on here telling of our abuse or criticising Scn or the CofS is also "activism" and "suppressive". Fzers promoting alternatives and criticisng Hubbard are "activists".

We are all SP "activists", dedicated to exposing Scn's faults and helping people escape the cult. Even the purpose of putting exes back in touch with each other is a "Suppressive Act" and an "activist" one.

Of course ESMB is an "activist" board!

I took Emma's opening post to more or less be talking about this. For more than two decades, people like me remained silent, knowing how abusive the CofS was, while our silence allowed the cult to con more into becoming slaves.

Some ESMBers here would never have been conned by Hubbard if we had spoken out "actively" back then. Isn't that what Emma's opening post was about?

It is these "activist" "Suppressive Acts" that are bringing about the public exposure of Scn which "Anonymous" then use so effectively in the protests.

These are great days for all us "activists". Long live the "Suppressive Act"!

 

[Emma]

I'm confused. Are you now saying it is time to get back on the fence? Surely you, and therefore the board (as your creation) had an agenda when you wrote the first post? And now it doesn't? What's changed? Personally I think everyone has an agenda. Its human nature. We do things for a reason. I have an agenda. Currently its to be contrarian (in case you didn't notice). Perhaps you meant that the board doesn't have any affiliations. Perhaps not. I'm not that fussed, but I am confused as to the change between the two quoted posts.

Neo

Nothing has changed Neo.

ESMB and me are two different entities. ESMB is a board I created for a specific PURPOSE but without an agenda.

I (as an individual) have my own ideas about Scientology.

There is a difference.

I'll be perfectly honest here. If I started ESMB 5 years ago and made it to fit my OWN personal agenda, there would have been no freezone allowed, lots of exposing Scientology's crimes, lots of angry posts about how bad Scientology is. I was still angry. I felt betrayed and deceived. I wanted to end the Church.

Three years on from that (when I did start ESMB) I felt differently and I realised that I've felt differently nearly every year of being out and that my "agenda" is constantly changing and "settling". I also realised that NOBODY else will feel exactly the way I do about the church on any given day about any given aspect of the church. So ESMB wasn't built around my own agenda.

I saw that a board was needed where people can comfortably and safely communicate about anything concerning Scientology and that included practising Scn away from the church. I'm talking about discussion topics here, not topics dear to my heart. They aren't the same thing.

When it comes to me, personally, I still have my own ideas that occasionally I like to voice. Although I have come to realise that out of everyone here, I have the least freedom of expression and speech because people don't differentiate between me as an individual and me AS ESMB. If "Emma" says she doesn't like the FZ, then ESMB is anti FZ. If "Emma" says that Hubbard wasn't all bad then ESMB is an apologist board. If "Emma" says that DM should be "shot" then ESMB is an activist board. You see what I mean?

I have had to keep most of my personal opinions to myself and quite honestly haven't said a great deal over the last two years about my personal feelings towards Hubbard, Scientology, the FZ etc because of that.

I was asking Emma a question because I have a genuine concern as to the statement "ESMB is not an activist board". Which is a completely different statement than "ESMB is more than an activist board". I went on Today Tonight out of a spirit of activism. Emma set it up for me to do it. What has changed? Did I risk my neck for nothing? Why is me asking these questions a cause of concern to people? This is as much my community as it is yours.

I must have said that "ESMB is NOT an activist board" at least a dozen times over the last two years. I'm sorry if you missed it previously. Does that mean that I haven't been an "activist" or been involved in "activist" activities over the past 8 years? NO. I do what I want when I want to. I think you know just how "activist" I've been behind the scenes Neo. I know you know what has gone on and what I've been involved in. I've trusted you with certain bits of information.

I'm sorry if you feel you risked your neck. I certainly never held a gun to your head and demanded you do anything. I set up an opportunity for you that you took and I thought you were very proud of what you did. I know I was proud of your courage.

I started ESMB to be a service to people leaving Scientology. It was never based on my opinion of Scn or what I think should happen to Scientology or the tech. They are completely disrelated.

And I feel the need to be contrarian, not out of fun (but thank you for the snide comment) but as stated above, out of a genuine concern. Yours is not the only point of view on this board Carmel. If you learnt to take other view points then maybe you would get how people can benefit from being different. Or at least see where they are coming from.

Neo

Be as contrarian as you like. You won't get any agrument from me about expressing your opinions, as long as they are YOUR opinions and not just attempts at covert digs because of some perceived unresolved, offtopic, disrelated personal situation.

 

[Emma]

Just a small clarification.

When I say "ESMB is not an activist board" it's the same thing as when I say "ESMB is not a FZ board" or ESMB is not a "recovery board".

It is just my attempt to stop people trying to put ESMB into any particular basket.

Activism happens here, recovery happens here, FZ discussion happens here and it's all just fine with me so long as nobody trys to label ESMB as any one particular thing.

 

[Tiger Lily]

Good post Emma.

I feel bad though, it's the ultimate irony that the person doing all the work to keep this going is the one who can't use the full potential of it.

I got it!! Get yourself another identity that only you know is you and discuss away!!

I totally get what you are saying about your viewpoint changing over time. I've seen that in myself just in a couple months.

-TL

 

[Alanzo]

Any criticism that I have laid against activism came from the fact that I am a 1.1 arm-chair critic who feels he has to destroy anyone doing anything constructive.

Just kidding.

I believe that anything can and should be questioned, especially when activism becomes unquestioning, the "other side" is de-personalized in order to recruit more people to rise up against them, and when the truth suffers and no one seems to care.

Personally, I want a critic movement that I can continue to feel proud to be part of. Avoiding those things above, and speaking out about them when I perceive them, are vitally important to me.

There is good and bad to the Church of Scientology.

And there is good and bad to criticism of the Church of Scientology.

Activism can become militarism, and militarism is, by necessity, blind to the rights and humanity of the "enemy".

I could never live with myself if criticism of Scientology, and activism against its abuses, became militant and unthinking and unfair to Scientologists.

I always try to remember that the Church of Scientology is filled with human beings just like us, that they have a right to believe as they wish, and that the target must always be the abuse of Scientologists by the Church of Scientology and their rights.

There is such a thing as a mob mentality in human beings and it becomes a danger when we become too certain of ourselves and the "rightness of our crusade". If there is anything to be learned from having been mentally manipulated as a Scientologist by the Church of Scientology, it is that.

So I have been critical in the past of activism when I see signs of it becoming too unthinking, and too militaristic.

We are not at war.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

WUT!!? They ain't gnashing their teeth over me? - Are you telling me I'm a failure!!??

Ok, joking aside.. I'd expect feezoners and indies to use 'nice' scientology.. ARC an all that.. A litlle flattery.. Affinity.. Responding to posts at .5 above my tone level. Shifting topic to my perceived interests..

It's still a 'valiant' attempt at control!

I don't mind.. Usually.. It's heaps better than the Sinister Scam Cult of Scientology.

Sometimes I ignore the ARC handling.. When I think the point of debate is more important... Or I'm just in a foul mood..

Wanting to control one's life isn't the same as trying to control others ala slavemaster, cult, etc, though.

And you know, Schimmy, sometimes people display "ARC" because they actually like you. Really.

 

[Zinjifar]

Maybe I should explain myself, since I'm the person who said 'ESMB is not an *activist* board' first.

'Activism' per se doesn't bother me much. It implies purposeful action. Depending on the purpose, that can be good or bad.

However 'activist' takes on whole other implications. It implies a single-mindedness and dedication to purpose that has rubbed me the wrong way for 40 years now. And, when 'activists' get together, it implies 'Solidarity', which in turn, for me, implies a 'Willingness to lie for the cause', an 'Us Them' mentality; a 'moral superiority' over those *not* as dedicated as 'Us'.

If ESMB were an 'activist' board, then 'counter intention' would be anathema. Failure to subscribe to the party line would be contrary to the 'purpose' and even a lack of dedication to the 'Cause' would be less than adequate.

WWP, for example, *is* an activist board. It exists for a *purpose*. Those not subscribing to the purpose actually are in the wrong place. It's perfectly reasonable that, on a forum operating for a 'purpose', anybody who doesn't 'get with the program' probably *should* be shitcanned when it distracts from or dilutes the 'purpose'.

As it happens, I approve of the 'purpose' of WWP and I think they do good things. I just have no desire to hang out there. Nor do I have any desire to see ESMB become some kind of WWP with a different cast and slightly different flavor.

Certainly there *are* activists on ESMB. All kinds of activists. Recipe activists; political activists; anti-Scn activists; cat activists, even 'Tech Activists', all of various degrees of 'activism'. Coexisting in some kind of melange with the *Un-Dedicated*.

But, by their nature, 'activists' tend to want *everybody* to join their activism, and, when they don't get their way, they tend to harp and browbeat and sulk and, at that point, for me, activists become *very* tiresome.

Zinj

 

[Alanzo]

Maybe I should explain myself, since I'm the person who said 'ESMB is not an *activist* board' first.

'Activism' per se doesn't bother me much. It implies purposeful action. Depending on the purpose, that can be good or bad.

However 'activist' takes on whole other implications. It implies a single-mindedness and dedication to purpose that has rubbed me the wrong way for 40 years now. And, when 'activists' get together, it implies 'Solidarity', which in turn, for me, implies a 'Willingness to lie for the cause', an 'Us Them' mentality; a 'moral superiority' over those *not* as dedicated as 'Us'.

If ESMB were an 'activist' board, then 'counter intention' would be anathema. Failure to subscribe to the party line would be contrary to the 'purpose' and even a lack of dedication to the 'Cause' would be less than adequate.

WWP, for example, *is* an activist board. It exists for a *purpose*. Those not subscribing to the purpose actually are in the wrong place. It's perfectly reasonable that, on a forum operating for a 'purpose', anybody who doesn't 'get with the program' probably *should* be shitcanned when it distracts from or dilutes the 'purpose'.

As it happens, I approve of the 'purpose' of WWP and I think they do good things. I just have no desire to hang out there. Nor do I have any desire to see ESMB become some kind of WWP with a different cast and slightly different flavor.

Certainly there *are* activists on ESMB. All kinds of activists. Recipe activists; political activists; anti-Scn activists; cat activists, even 'Tech Activists', all of various degrees of 'activism'. Coexisting in some kind of melange with the *Un-Dedicated*.

But, by their nature, 'activists' tend to want *everybody* to join their activism, and, when they don't get their way, they tend to harp and browbeat and sulk and, at that point, for me, activists become *very* tiresome.

Zinj

I'm sorry, I refuse to be part of a melange.

If you get a melange on you, does it come off with soap?

 

[Alanzo]

By the way, I support WWP, too.

But I could never hang out there, either.

As a 1.1 armchair critic who must obsessively destroy anyone doing anything constructive, they would tear me limb from limb.

 

[dexter gelfand]

A metter of opinion

Maybe I should explain myself, since I'm the person who said 'ESMB is not an *activist* board' first.

'Activism' per se doesn't bother me much. It implies purposeful action. Depending on the purpose, that can be good or bad.

However 'activist' takes on whole other implications. It implies a single-mindedness and dedication to purpose that has rubbed me the wrong way for 40 years now. And, when 'activists' get together, it implies 'Solidarity', which in turn, for me, implies a 'Willingness to lie for the cause', an 'Us Them' mentality; a 'moral superiority' over those *not* as dedicated as 'Us'.

If ESMB were an 'activist' board, then 'counter intention' would be anathema. Failure to subscribe to the party line would be contrary to the 'purpose' and even a lack of dedication to the 'Cause' would be less than adequate.

WWP, for example, *is* an activist board. It exists for a *purpose*. Those not subscribing to the purpose actually are in the wrong place. It's perfectly reasonable that, on a forum operating for a 'purpose', anybody who doesn't 'get with the program' probably *should* be shitcanned when it distracts from or dilutes the 'purpose'.

As it happens, I approve of the 'purpose' of WWP and I think they do good things. I just have no desire to hang out there. Nor do I have any desire to see ESMB become some kind of WWP with a different cast and slightly different flavor.

Certainly there *are* activists on ESMB. All kinds of activists. Recipe activists; political activists; anti-Scn activists; cat activists, even 'Tech Activists', all of various degrees of 'activism'. Coexisting in some kind of melange with the *Un-Dedicated*.

But, by their nature, 'activists' tend to want *everybody* to join their activism, and, when they don't get their way, they tend to harp and browbeat and sulk and, at that point, for me, activists become *very* tiresome.

Zinj

That's quite fairly stated, Zinj. My view differs from yours, but I have no argument with you saying what you think and putting it that way.

I'm sure I qualify, as a tech supporter on this board, but I really don't mind that not everybody is or will be a Scientologist, in fact I'm genuinely happy for whatever someone else does that makes their state of existence better. its my preference that others grant the same to me, and to each other.

Love, Dex

 

[lionheart]

Emma, why not try, when you post an opinion, simply adding that it is your opinion and not a statement about ESMB.

Would that help you? I don't think anyone would object to you stating personal opinions, like we all do. It's only fair that you have the chance to express opinions too.

It ought to be possible for you to differentiate and clarify between personal opinion and ESMB guidance.

 

[uniquemand]

I'm not particularly concerned about Anon forums. My personal eval is that they are often full of hostile people who will fuck with anyone for any reason. The forums dedicated to that sort of thing are not a big loss, IMO, when they explode, and it's totally predictable that this would happen, since that's the nature of the folks there.

I have enjoyed interacting with some anons, here, and at protests, but I wouldn't be particularly happy if this forum became an anon forum. This is an ex-scientologist forum, not a "we hate the world, and scientology too" forum.

 

[lionheart]

I'm not particularly concerned about Anon forums. My personal eval is that they are often full of hostile people who will fuck with anyone for any reason. The forums dedicated to that sort of thing are not a big loss, IMO, when they explode, and it's totally predictable that this would happen, since that's the nature of the folks there.

I have enjoyed interacting with some anons, here, and at protests, but I wouldn't be particularly happy if this forum became an anon forum. This is an ex-scientologist forum, not a "we hate the world, and scientology too" forum.

Who has tried to turn ESMB into a "we hate the world, and scientology too" forum? :confused2: But I do know Hubbard equated criticism with hatred.

I don't really get what some of these conversations are getting at. I've been on ESMB since it started and the only people who came close to expressing hate for the world were Scientologists with their silly points of view about "wogs".

I've not seen too many anons expressing hatred for the world. :confused2:

I also don't really get this point about "activists". When is something "activism" and when is it not? Is providing a forum for exes to speak to each other, activism?

Is informing scientologists of some of the facts about Ron, activism?

What about speaking to the media?

Or are we differentiating "activism" as being restricted to the protests? If so, why? I don't get it. :confused2:

Not many exes protest outside the orgs. But on here there are many "activist" exes - we are all publicly expressing dissent, in one way or another. We are all "SPs" committing "Suppressive Acts"! Hooray! ESMB is an activist board, but not particularly a protest organising board.

 

[Zinjifar]

When it comes to 'marching shoulder to shoulder' you'll find me down at the pub.

Zinj