New theme for ESMB?

flashgordon

Patron with Honors
There seems to be a new theme developing on ESMB, that differing views are simply trolling, and possibly OSA.

When ESMB started there was an atmosphere of tolerance and posters with differing views were engaged or not depending on the intelligence and interesting ideas in their posts.

There was a general sympathy for the residual fondness for the tech by the people who rejected it, as it was part of the common experience.

And the tech lovers understood those who rejected it as they also had similar invalidative experiences with the church's culture.

The arrival of the anon and its very different culture, and the more recent arrival of a substantial force of Australians, who are very self confident in their own correctness, seems to be turning ESMB from Emma's tea party, to campaign headquarters against the church.

Pro scientology views are ridiculed with little thought given to the fact that they are views once also held by most of the people here.

Threads are treated as if this is all about serious business.

What happened to this being a place where we could all talk, with out the subtext of suspicion and the implication that hidden adgendas were being run?

Diverting a thread may just be a way to keep some conversation going. Some of the best threads on this board have gone for hundreds of pages with massive diversions and then someone replies to the original posters theme and its back on course. Its all communication.

I am personally sensitive to this OSA paranoia as I have often been accused of being such. I am listed on lermanet.com as such. And I have a tendency to have thoughts sparked by what people say and post in a thread with tagential thoughts that some would think diversionary.

But there are people on this board who have access to my real name.

My whole point being that some of the feeling that this is a safe place for anyone with a scientology experience to talk is to some degree being undermined by a trend towards stonger activism and less tolerance.

For those of you who feel the need to "rescue" your fellow man from thier beliefs, perhaps you are shooting yourself in the foot when you encourage an atmosphere of looking out for the OSA and labeling differences as trolling.

I have no qualms with seeing people who left the church as people of good intent. I desire reform in the church, and think that it is currently way off track from its stated goals. But is anti-scientology really a good new religion?

alex (who expects to be relabeled an osa troll. perhaps emma will change my "status" lable to osa troll extrodinare.)

Old post but a good one.

There does seem to be an intolerance on this web site to anyone giving an opinion or point of view that is different than what the majority think.

Can you think of another group of people ( or church ) who are intolerant towards people with who have a different point of view than what the group thinks?
 

GreyWolf

Gold Meritorious Patron
Please let me state, for the record, my position on this. I totally respect anyone's personal spiritual beliefs and will defend to the death thier right to practice any religion they wish to. However there are people here who have every right and cause to be suspicious of OSA. Ex SO's and Ex Execs have been looking behind thier backs for a lot of years. You can't spend that much time looking behind you without being a little paranoid.

Love and Respect

Bob
 

Markus

Silver Meritorious Patron
Old post but a good one.

There does seem to be an intolerance on this web site to anyone giving an opinion or point of view that is different than what the majority think.

Can you think of another group of people ( or church ) who are intolerant towards people with who have a different point of view than what the group thinks?

Alex was always free to say everything no matter how far away from truth it was to defend L Ron Hubbards nonsense Technology. I have observed this "Technology" as very dangerous and even deadly nonsense for my family. So I am free to say this here. I hope that you understand that I was not always amused how true believers like Alex often tried to play down the role Mr Hubbard played in this wicked game. And in my opinion Scientology can't be reformed simply because Hubbard stopped any kind of "reformation" through KSW. So if you want to reform it you have to do it without Hubbard - but without Hubbard Scientology is nothing - like the Christians would be nothing without Jesus.
On the other hand I would have never started a thread in order to eliminate any pro Scientology members from ESMB - Like Alex did it with this thread against the Anti - Scientology posters - simply because I am aware that even when he is so very wrong I still can learn something from his so very different point of view.

Love

Markus
 

Markus

Silver Meritorious Patron
Please define harsh...

I did see some people here get rather harsh with Alex.

How do you define harsh? You know - if you and your family are affected in such a cruel way as me and my family were for more than 30 years many statements a true believer like Alex made here on this board are very harsh for you. So if he (Alex)is (was)trying to defend the Technology which caused so many many abuses and pain and death he should be aware that some people are not very amused. I'm not trying to defend the members here who were impolite to him - but it is the job of the moderators to decide wether somebody is not accepting the rules of this board. As far as I know Alex was banned for two weeks in September 2009. Unfortunately he seemed to have stopped posting after this ban.

Love

Markus
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
I do not consider expressing disagreement with views to be harsh at all. Just so you know.

I saw some namecalling, too, though. That's mainly what I was thinking of when I wrote the other post.
 

altruistichedonist

Patron with Honors
I do not consider expressing disagreement with views to be harsh at all. Just so you know.

I saw some namecalling, too, though. That's mainly what I was thinking of when I wrote the other post.

Will someone who has a few hours to spare please join in and pick a fight with the ex Scientologist Claire to get her over 10,000 posts before Thursday at 2.:D

Pleaze. Pleaze. Tease the Sleeze. :thumbsup:

Hey fluffy, dear Wench, are you up to it ?

Why'd it take you ten years to finally open up ?:unsure:

Is John turning into a rail ?:unsure:

What's it take to bullbait you into a rant session for 28 posts ?:whistling:
 

Markus

Silver Meritorious Patron
I do not consider expressing disagreement with views to be harsh at all. Just so you know.

I saw some namecalling, too, though. That's mainly what I was thinking of when I wrote the other post.

Yes exactly - this is how I see it too - to express diagreement is not harsh at all. But if you think Scientology is a criminal abusive organization you should be free to express that. And if you for yourself found out that this crimes of the church were clearly caused by the stupid Technology of MR. Hubbard you should be free to express this here. Even if this is causing big discontent for true believers of the Tech on this board.

And "name calling" is absolutely not ok - I totally aggree - but this was not my point.

Love

Markus
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
Unlike in a Scientology world, disagreement on ESMB does not constitute harassment.

We are allowed to invalidate crap anytime we see it. We can even put little comical flags on it and point it out to others.

Bear in mind, this applies to *any* piece of crap, even those I generate. In general ESMB requires a modicum of civility in discourse, but, it does *not* require telling crazy aunt Sally who wears a lampshade that her elizabethan crown proves that she's the legitimate monarch.

Nobody here has ESMB thugs sent out to 'ruin them utterly' for something they say here, although they may well have to survive laughter. Including, in the best of circumstances, learning to laugh at themselves.

Zinj
 

Doom

Lurking.
Unlike in a Scientology world, disagreement on ESMB does not constitute harassment.

We are allowed to invalidate crap anytime we see it. We can even put little comical flags on it and point it out to others.

Bear in mind, this applies to *any* piece of crap, even those I generate. In general ESMB requires a modicum of civility in discourse, but, it does *not* require telling crazy aunt Sally who wears a lampshade that her elizabethan crown proves that she's the legitimate monarch.

Nobody here has ESMB thugs sent out to 'ruin them utterly' for something they say here, although they may well have to survive laughter. Including, in the best of circumstances, learning to laugh at themselves.

Zinj
I think that just about sums it up
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Yes exactly - this is how I see it too - to express diagreement is not harsh at all. But if you think Scientology is a criminal abusive organization you should be free to express that. And if you for yourself found out that this crimes of the church were clearly caused by the stupid Technology of MR. Hubbard you should be free to express this here. Even if this is causing big discontent for true believers of the Tech on this board.

And "name calling" is absolutely not ok - I totally aggree - but this was not my point.

Love

Markus

Then I actually think you and I are in total agreement.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
AH, I dunno if I can make that stat...but thank god I don't have to do stats, not even for this lovely forum and the lovely admin and forum regulars therein.

John's doing fine. I mentioned this to him. He didn't really say anything. His love was never conditional, same as with my friends.
 

flashgordon

Patron with Honors


Pleaze. Pleaze. Tease the Sleeze. :thumbsup:

Hey fluffy, dear Wench, are you up to it ?



This is an example of what needs to stop.

"Sleeze" and "Wench", this is just name calling and should be stopped on this website.

Apparently name calling is ok on this website but pro Scientology viewpoints will get you banned or labeled a "troll".
 
Last edited:

flashgordon

Patron with Honors
We are allowed to invalidate crap anytime we see it. We can even put little comical flags on it and point it out to others.

Bear in mind, this applies to *any* piece of crap, even those I generate.

Well Zinj, I'm glad you finally admitted that you do in fact, generate crap.
 

byte301

Crusader
This is an example of what needs to stop.

"Sleeze" and "Wench", this is just name calling and should be stopped on this website.

Apparently name calling is ok on this website but pro Scientology viewpoints will get you banned or labeled a "troll".

Fluffly can take care of herself. She doesn't afraid of anything.

What really needs to stop around here is your obvious vendetta against Zinj.
Why don't you go on over to your hero Marty's blog and kiss his ass some more? He will love it no doubt. You can whine about Zinj over there all you want with no disagreements I'm sure. It doesn't play on this board.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
This is an example of what needs to stop.

"Sleeze" and "Wench", this is just name calling and should be stopped on this website.

Apparently name calling is ok on this website but pro Scientology viewpoints will get you banned or labeled a "troll".

A teasing post is not the same thing as name calling.
 
Top