Gold Meritorious Patron
No. I came after Alanzo AV1.0 and although I had some familiarity with the mixed reviews I didn't follow it like AV2.0 but I can understand how previous version(s) were banned presumably because the program is agenda based and not discussion based. If ESMB were to continue under the new open policy I expect threads and posts would be relentlessly littered with this stuff. I also expect that it would be increasingly ignored. The only reason I respond to it at all is for general consumption and it has taken a relatively short time for me to figure that out. I stopped trying to respond to AV2.0 directly because the interface isn't really interactive, it's output is glitchy and I spend most of my time trying to correct it's inability to duplicate input. If we consider that that redefines ESMB then I guess it does but given time I think ESMB would intuitively develop workarounds, as it were. That we don't have time gives the impression that this minor or sub-app is more important than it really is.I respect what you say here. I would say that no ESMB is a bad thing, having it is definitely good. I am doing better from much that is contained within and spoken about here.
Last point I will make is this: Have you ever seen this before, where the Scientology smear sites show up here within the confines of ESMB, not specifically the sites, but talking points which could come from those sites itself, but written by different posters within the community? And furthered time after time now going onto two months? Relentlessly?
And yes, I like that you make the distinction that Scientology corp talking points can have harmonics (one of Hubbard's favorite words) in other strata of the community without necessarily officially coming from Sciocorp. I consider this to be much like trolls can troll without any other explanation than some people are inherently trolls. Once you know the motivation then you really only need to understand that and you can tune out the noise. Scientology has made themselves irrelevant because we understand their motivations. Whatever they say about Leah and Mike can be disregarded. AV2.0 let itself be defined by very thinly veiled attempts to characterize highly diverse individuals as some kind of cult in order to establish a moral equivalency argument between Scientology and Scientology critics. The motivation was duplicitous and therefor anything that AV2.0 outputs now lacks credibility.
It has been annoying but I have to admit that the learning curve wasn't completely without some beneficial edification.