Why Mike and Marty don't publicly apologize? My take (fwiw)

[Alanzo]

Sarcasm noted. Not a great start but at least we have some agreement.

EMMA!

You have to believe me.

There was absolutely NO SARCASM in my post!

This is a problem. People REALLY do not get when I am sincere.

I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE TIME
THAT YOU TOOK WITH ME
PERSONALLY TO DO AND SAY THIS!

​

FUCK!

​

 

[AnonyMary]

No! All threads are now about Alanzo, and how to make him comfortable.

I think this comment of yours was uncalled for. Just saying...

 

[Emma]

EMMA!

You have to believe me.

There was absolutely NO SARCASM in my post!

This is a problem. People REALLY do not get when I am sincere.

I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE TIME
THAT YOU TOOK WITH ME
PERSONALLY TO DO AND SAY THIS!

​

FUCK!

Allright. I believe you.

 

[Anonycat]

I think this comment of yours was uncalled for. Just saying...

That what I was doing ... 'just saying'.

 

[Free Being Me]

Now time for some music, thanks for another memorable thread

[video=youtube;qN1dbRI8rc8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN1dbRI8rc8[/video]

 

[Gadfly]

No! All threads are now about Alanzo, and how to make him comfortable.

I know it will be hard for some of us, but just exert a little effort, and apply this simply rule:

Do not mention the name of a poster unless it is positive (and blowing smoke up their ass).

I say that with humor, but also, I mean it.

Do not even cross any unwritten lines and even so much as slyly imply something about the intentions, thoughts, feelings, motivations, behaviors or aims of another poster. The idea is to keep the discussions "poster-free" - or, in other words, not ever or at all about the poster. Discuss Scientology, and firmly decide and steel yourself against the urge to overtly or covertly mention others (instead of or in addition to the topic).

I have seen a poster say something like, "I hope you have gotten over what I said". It is actually a make-wrong, an introversion technique, and implies some upset mental state about the other. It implies a fault in the other (the upset).

This will not be easy for some. Granted.

Now, I am so over talking about talking.

 

[Anonycat]

I know it will be hard for some of us, but just exert a little effort, and apply this simply rule:

Do not mention the name of a poster unless it is positive (and blowing smoke up their ass).

I say that with humor, but also, I mean it.

Do not even cross any unwritten lines and even so much as slyly imply something about the intentions, thoughts, feelings, motivations or aims of another poster. The idea is to keep the discussions "poster-free" - or, in other words, not ever or at all about the poster. Discuss Scientology and decide and steel yourself against the urge to overtly or covertly mention others (instead of or in addition to the topic).

I have seen a poster say something like, "I hope you have gotten over what I said". It is actually a make-wrong, an introversion technique, and implies some upset mental state about the other. It implies a fault in the other (the upset).

This will not be easy for some. Granted.

Now, I am so over talking about talking.

My point was: two threads are now about Alonzo and his level of comfort. And they are not the topics of the threads. Sometimes I call them as I see them. That was my only point.

 

[Terril park]

EMMA!

You have to believe me.

There was absolutely NO SARCASM in my post!

This is a problem. People REALLY do not get when I am sincere.

I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE TIME
THAT YOU TOOK WITH ME
PERSONALLY TO DO AND SAY THIS!

​

FUCK!

​

I commented go ahead with grace. This isn't grace.

Better to not have commented.

But you are getting somewhere. IMO mainly because of Emma's forbearance.

Send her some flowers or chocolates or both.

Or perhaps a pink hat. I believe she likes them

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Thank you, AnonMary. I did re-read the entire message about cessation of hostilities.


Please help me to understand. I really don't understand how it is personal.

I don't see it as an attack either.

I am open to apologize if I did say something personal.

Because I used the word "fool"? Maybe I misused this word I guess. When I look it up, this is the closest to what I meant by the word (Wikipedia):

Distinction was made between fools and clowns, or country bumpkins. The fool's status was one of privilege within a royal or noble household. His folly could be regarded as the raving of a madman but was often deemed to be divinely inspired. The 'natural' fool was touched by God. Much to Gonerill's annoyance, Lear's 'all-licensed' Fool enjoys a privileged status. His characteristic idiom suggests he is a "natural" fool, not an artificial one, though his perceptiveness and wit show that he is far from being an idiot, however "touched" he might be.[5]


-----

Please lay it out for me, how this is personal? I honestly don't understand. None of the observations I am making in the post are from knowing him, they are from posts here on the board.... He can get wild but he is not a bad person or someone who has an agenda.

I tried to write him a PM but he has blocked PMs so I have really no idea what the heck. Sorry if I am thick-skulled but I don't get it.



---

Maybe putting in that definition is going to make it worse. Oh well. Maybe I have over-extended my stay here.

Well I will say this at the expense of breaking the rules.

Making people tired of this board and distrustful of this board and pissed off at this board is what someone else is trying to accomplish.

Don't fall for it.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

snip

It's kind of the culture of the "ESMB crew" here to engage in personal attacks, snide personal put-downs, and outright character assassination of the people they don't like.

snip

I apologize for that.

It's much more productive to simply have the board owner and the moderators apply the board rules on personal attacks.

But hey - don't take it from me.

Alanzo

Do you think people can't see this snide, sneaky way of apologizing while at the same time insulting others?

Alanzo, I think this board is too mature for you. We see right through you.

You can't fool people here anymore.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

It's the kind of thing that needs leadership.

Another snide dig, Alanzo.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Gib]

Thank you, AnonMary. I did re-read the entire message about cessation of hostilities.


Please help me to understand. I really don't understand how it is personal.

I don't see it as an attack either.

I am open to apologize if I did say something personal.

Because I used the word "fool"? Maybe I misused this word I guess. When I look it up, this is the closest to what I meant by the word (Wikipedia):

Distinction was made between fools and clowns, or country bumpkins. The fool's status was one of privilege within a royal or noble household. His folly could be regarded as the raving of a madman but was often deemed to be divinely inspired. The 'natural' fool was touched by God. Much to Gonerill's annoyance, Lear's 'all-licensed' Fool enjoys a privileged status. His characteristic idiom suggests he is a "natural" fool, not an artificial one, though his perceptiveness and wit show that he is far from being an idiot, however "touched" he might be.[5]


-----

Please lay it out for me, how this is personal? I honestly don't understand. None of the observations I am making in the post are from knowing him, they are from posts here on the board.... He can get wild but he is not a bad person or someone who has an agenda.

I tried to write him a PM but he has blocked PMs so I have really no idea what the heck. Sorry if I am thick-skulled but I don't get it.



---

Maybe putting in that definition is going to make it worse. Oh well. Maybe I have over-extended my stay here.

thanks for giving the definition of "fool" that you were thinking with.

I never saw that definition before,

and hubbard did mention the "fool" in his lectures along with the Tarot Cards.

So, the "fool" is actually a wise person.

 

[Lone Star]

My point was: two threads are now about Alonzo and his level of comfort. And they are not the topics of the threads. Sometimes I call them as I see them. That was my only point.

^^^^^^^^
Agreed, and let's just say that Big Al has achieved largely what he set out to achieve since his reappearance.

Well I think I'll catch up on reading some books that I've been putting off for too long, and just occasionally hang out on the off topic threads.

Fuck Scientology.

I will give Big Al credit for helping me to see that regurgitating all this Scientology shit is not that helpful after all. Sometimes a realization comes from a source you least expect...an Armadillo of all things!

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Okay, I made some remarks to Alanzo that I saw before the cease-fire between Alanzo and Emma.

So for those I apologize.

Enough said.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Gib]

^^^^^^^^
Agreed, and let's just say that Big Al has achieved largely what he set out to achieve since his reappearance.

Well I think I'll catch up on reading some books that I've been putting off for too long, and just occasionally hang out on the off topic threads.

Fuck Scientology.

I will give Big Al credit for helping me to see that regurgitating all this Scientology shit is not that helpful after all. Sometimes a realization comes from a source you least expect...an Armadillo of all things!

true dat,

I'm here for the laughs and for noobs.

But, of course, Fuck Scientology.

And yes I give Big Al credit,

But I give myself more credit for seeking the truth.

 

[Anonycat]

thanks for giving the definition of "fool" that you were thinking with.

I never saw that definition before,

and hubbard did mention the "fool" in his lectures along with the Tarot Cards.

So, the "fool" is actually a wise person.

When I was a teen, I used the word "nice" in a normal way, when talking to a staff member where I was. He quickly told me that the root of 'nice' was "foolish". And he did want to beat me at a later time. Oh, scientology. It's not 500 years ago, and we're not speaking Middle English.

 

[Gadfly]

Well I will say this at the expense of breaking the rules.

Making people tired of this board and distrustful of this board and pissed off at this board is what someone else is trying to accomplish.

Don't fall for it.

The Anabaptist Jacques

I think one can get away with it as long as one does not mention any exact names, and doesn't get even close to implying WHO it might be.

I suppose keeping it general and vague is allowed - but again, it is just more talking about posters instead of talking about Scientology - which functions as a distraction to useful criticism and discussion of Hubbard & Scientology.

 

[Type4_PTS]

Well I will say this at the expense of breaking the rules.

Making people tired of this board and distrustful of this board and pissed off at this board is what someone else is trying to accomplish.

Don't fall for it.

It sounds as though you can clearly see Alanzo's intentions but not Hubbard's (as in the excerpt of your post below).

<snip>

As far as Hubbard's intentions go, people can make conclusions about what they think they are, but no one knows for sure what anyone really thinks.

We can only surmise based on statements and events.

But I have done a lot of research work on other people in history, and I know it is impossible to tell what anyone is truly thinking.
<snip>

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

..

Originally Posted by Terril

.. Of course, such ideas cannot be applied within the context of the Church of Scientology.

They could before. Now I'm sure they'd get one declared.

"We of the Church believe:

That all men have inalienable rights to their own lives.

That all men have inalienable rights to their sanity.

That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.

And that no agency less than God has the power to suspend or set aside these rights, overtly or covertly."​

Terril,

Great stuff! You are so right! When Ron was running it, he was so deeply concerned about Human Rights!

Awesome obnosis!

ML,

Paulette Cooper


​

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

It sounds as though you can clearly see Alanzo's intentions but not Hubbard's (as in the excerpt of your post below).

Guilty as charged.

I cannot tell what anyone's intentions really are.

I can only surmise.

The Anabaptist Jacques