ESMB and The Freezone - let's have it out!

[Voltaire's Child]

Well that would make things easier but I can't see a way to do that. What would you suggest?

Well, I think I could see a way or really, I guess it would be a bunch of ways.

For one thing, keep in mind that if someone says they like M and Ms, they aren't telling people to eat them. But there are M and M addicts who try to get other people to try them. There really are. (just get the peanut ones away from me, is all I say...)

So right there, one's distinguished from another.

So with that premise there, then the rules of conduct could be changed accordingly. They do that on Beliefnet. You can witter on and on about Catholicism, Satanism, Shamanism, Scn, Judaism on those debate boards, but you can't recommend those ologies and religions and isms even if it's obvious you're a member. If you do or the moderator imagines that you did, your post gets nuked.

There could be a preamble to certain sections of the board saying that we can discuss these things but can't proselytize.

I will say this, though: certain critics proselytize all the time, they tell others not to do Scn anymore, and this is NOT looked upon as proselytization. Well, I say it is and I say it is, because,well, it is. But I would be totally receptive to and understanding if that were the only proselytization allowed on ESMB because this is Emma's board and her vision as to how it should be is what we should have.

I also find it interesting how life changes things. One starts with a project- like this one- and then it goes along a certain way then things change as one gets feedback. The board has already been restructured in some ways since it began, some sub forums are set up differently or even dropped. I just find this sort of thing interesting and it seems to me that Emma's done a great job and still is doing a great job in reevaluating and revising things.

 

[Dulloldfart]

Not just that, pm'ing people to try and convert them to your particular therapy / teaching etc.

Well, it's the big wide world. PM them back and say no thanks. If they persist complain to a moderator.

Paul

 

[Alanzo]

Well, I think I could see a way or really, I guess it would be a bunch of ways.

For one thing, keep in mind that if someone says they like M and Ms, they aren't telling people to eat them. But there are M and M addicts who try to get other people to try them. There really are. (just get the peanut ones away from me, is all I say...)

So right there, one's distinguished from another.

So with that premise there, then the rules of conduct could be changed accordingly. They do that on Beliefnet. You can witter on and on about Catholicism, Satanism, Shamanism, Scn, Judaism on those debate boards, but you can't recommend those ologies and religions and isms even if it's obvious you're a member. If you do or the moderator imagines that you did, your post gets nuked.

There could be a preamble to certain sections of the board saying that we can discuss these things but can't proselytize.

I will say this, though: certain critics proselytize all the time, they tell others not to do Scn anymore, and this is NOT looked upon as proselytization. Well, I say it is and I say it is, because,well, it is. But I would be totally receptive to and understanding if that were the only proselytization allowed on ESMB because this is Emma's board and her vision as to how it should be is what we should have.

I also find it interesting how life changes things. One starts with a project- like this one- and then it goes along a certain way then things change as one gets feedback. The board has already been restructured in some ways since it began, some sub forums are set up differently or even dropped. I just find this sort of thing interesting and it seems to me that Emma's done a great job and still is doing a great job in reevaluating and revising things.

I see. That makes it so clear.

So you are for some types of proselytism, and not others.

Clear as a bell!

 

[Voltaire's Child]

One factor that makes things a bit messy, sometimes, is that some Scientology Freezoners (when amongst EX-Scientologists) apply Scientology Public Relations tech, Faux "ARC"-manipulation tech, and good cop/bad cop (Mutt and Jeff) tech.

And so do some critics. I've seen a lot of tactics that were not unlike OSA tactics- employed by critics toward those whom they thought should change or be changed.

But the "report a post" button pretty much sorts that out.

I just wanted to point out the other thing, though, because I think there's this view or implication that you only get that with Scn'ists and it just ain't so.

 

[Boldgirl]

If we create an environment where anyone can say anything to anyone, then Freezoners can be attacked and picked apart for their ideas and practices, and exposed so that everyone can see what they are up to: if they are.

I do not think that the only stance on Scientology should be militantly anti. That was pretty much the only choice we had when we were first getting out: If you were an EX - then you were anti.

I don't care what other boards think of the position of ESMB. As many people have shown, you can have "anti" cults, too, where no postive response, or even civility, is allowed (i.e. ARS).

The only answer is to allow ALL points of view, to not restrict the flow of ANY information, and to not try to control anyone - for once.

After the cult, it's real good to just let people be who they are.

Ok I can agree with that--BUT that doesnt mean that all of us that see the true insanity in the TECH of scientology should stop POSTING LIKE MAD! COUNTER THE INSANITY OF FREEZONE....that's my promise.

Why? because the tech hurt me, it broke me, it damaged me and it is deadly serious crap when you are messing with people's minds. So the FZ's can keep saying how the tech works....but I for one say vehemently and 1000000% that FZ's have no right and no qualifications for messing with people's minds with a technology that has hurt people from 'being broken spiritually' to DEATH...

In my estimation, FZ'es are Hubbard lovers, still under mind control, and are still scientologists.

 

[Alanzo]

I am for no rules regarding proselytism.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

The FZ forum episode was interesting. I saw some negative stuff about ESMB being "full of lies and messed up cases" and so I replied. I got a mixed reaction but the overriding one was "don't come here and cause trouble or bring your entheta viewpoints". One poster even asked me to leave the forum. I admit I did start the fight by saying that the "messed up cases" were caused by "your beloved church". I also asked the question as to "what lies?" They didn't like it.

I have since found out that this particular forum is a hard line LRH/CoS purest forum that doesn't allow dissent.

To be fair I was backed up by Mark Baker & Terril and welcomed by one or two members.

What did disturb me was the seeming hypocrisy in that some members of that board view ESMB as a potential recruitment pool, yet others wouldn't allow me to post on their board unless I held the "party line" of no entheta. In short, I felt used.

The thread that concerns me the most is the recently retired "L correction" thread. I don't want to rehash that thread AT ALL. I just want to say that I'm absolutely disgusted that this persons privacy has been violated, and by the auditor no less. I'm not sure that I want any promotion of a group who will do that kind of thing just to brag or use the PC's status to boost his business.

As for PMs, well they are private. Lets just say that I do get a lot of complaints about FZ advertising. A lot of exes don't want to be exposed to more recruiting or advertising. They want a break from it, not to come here and be exposed to more of it.

So this is my dilemma. Free speech and no control over content or .....well......whatever the alternative is.

Just curious-- but why would you say "your beloved church" to Freezoners? They're not in CofS and they're not fans of it, AFAIK.

Maybe someone on the list defended CofS? That would be enough to prompt a comment like yours- I'd probably make one like that myself!

Also, I don't think it's all or nothing. Like I said, B'net allows some stuff but the minute they think someone's proselytizing ( at least on the debate section) they nuke the post.

 

[Alanzo]

Ok I can agree with that--BUT that doesnt mean that all of us that see the true insanity in the TECH of scientology should stop POSTING LIKE MAD! COUNTER THE INSANITY OF FREEZONE....that's my promise.

Why? because the tech hurt me, it broke me, it damaged me and it is deadly serious crap when you are messing with people's minds. So the FZ's can keep saying how the tech works....but I for one say vehemently and 1000000% that FZ's have no right and no qualifications for messing with people's minds with a technology that has hurt people from 'being broken spiritually' to DEATH...

In my estimation, FZ'es are Hubbard lovers, still under mind control, and are still scientologists.

Good!

We need you, boldgirl!!

Where the hell have you been???

 

[beyond_horizons]

...

I've seen this before in your posts and i'm now on to you Alanzo. This kind of attempt and post count increase ought to be punished by docking you 100 post points.

 

[Zinjifar]

I think, when it gets down to it, ESMB is 'not your private army'. Nor is it your private 'focus group' or 'target audience' or 'recruiting pool'.

Exploiting ESMB for your own personal agenda tends to get manipulative, and, when it's done by multiple people working 'in concert', it's irritating. This goes not only for practitioners of any specific 'Tech', but for any other 'group operation' prone to agenda evangelism, whether 'spiritual' or just attempts to infect ESMB with the kind of partisan mutual-blackslapping-cum-dogpiling so common on other forums.

So, while it's understandable that someone enthusiastic about his 'group' will want to talk about it, and, even promote it, it's also a likely source of irritation for the public at large, and, it's wise for the person who sees the irritation on the rise to re-examine his own input and see if maybe he's being a leeetle too enthusiastic and monomanic.

ESMB is not your private army/recruiting-ground.

Zinj

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Ok I can agree with that--BUT that doesnt mean that all of us that see the true insanity in the TECH of scientology should stop POSTING LIKE MAD! COUNTER THE INSANITY OF FREEZONE....that's my promise.

Why? because the tech hurt me, it broke me, it damaged me and it is deadly serious crap when you are messing with people's minds. So the FZ's can keep saying how the tech works....but I for one say vehemently and 1000000% that FZ's have no right and no qualifications for messing with people's minds with a technology that has hurt people from 'being broken spiritually' to DEATH...

In my estimation, FZ'es are Hubbard lovers, still under mind control, and are still scientologists.

Well, I'm not a Hubbard lover. I criticize him frequently. I know plenty of Freezoners who also do. Nobody controls me. I think it's best to look at individuals as individuals.

That's how I ended up being able to make friends with a number of critics and ultimately deciding to leave CofS, because I stopped looking at people like one big amorphous lump labelled "Critics" or "Freezoners" or "Scientologists".

 

[Alanzo]

Just curious-- but why would you say "your beloved church" to Freezoners? They're not in CofS and they're not fans of it, AFAIK.

Maybe someone on the list defended CofS? That would be enough to prompt a comment like yours- I'd probably make one like that myself!

Also, I don't think it's all or nothing. Like I said, B'net allows some stuff but the minute they think someone's proselytizing ( at least on the debate section) they nuke the post.

Beliefnet is the worst, most censorious, message board on the Internet.

They are a HORRIBLE EXAMPLE of how to handle things on a message board!

 

[Alanzo]

I've seen this before in your posts and i'm now on to you Alanzo. This kind of attempt and post count increase ought to be punished by docking you 100 post points.

Shit!

Busted!!!

 

[Voltaire's Child]

The point you're missing here is that by the time someone gets to this board after being in the cult ten, twenty, thirty, forty years, their brain is in such a mush that they are not even in a fit state to 'see' that they have a choice! That's why a lot of people go 'cult hopping' when they first get out, it's like an instilled command, when was the last time you were given a 'choice' whilst inside the cult, one can very easily forget, as I certainly did, that I have any choice about anything in my life in the first place!

It's all too easy for new people to get 'sucked in' by the freezone push and not so subtle advertising. It's easy for us to sit here and say oh well you don't have to read it if you don't want to, you can choose.. really?? Can I ?? I didn't realize, it's been over twenty years since I've made a desicion!!!! Not everyone coming to this board as a new person has that ability.

I guess I'd want to know why they were reading posts on a section or sub forum labelled "Freezone" or "Independent Field" and what they expected to find there.

But, as I say, I think this could be dealt with by changing rules of conduct. I've appreciated the no proselytization rules on the other forum I mentioned. One still can discuss stuff, it's just that one can't do THAT. This rule doesn't exist here but could easily be implemented. B'net has its problems and some stupidities, but no reason one couldn't lift just the one idea.

 

[Alanzo]

I think, when it gets down to it, ESMB is 'not your private army'. Nor is it your private 'focus group' or 'target audience' or 'recruiting pool'.

Exploiting ESMB for your own personal agenda tends to get manipulative, and, when it's done by multiple people working 'in concert', it's irritating. This goes not only for practitioners of any specific 'Tech', but for any other 'group operation' prone to agenda evangelism, whether 'spiritual' or just attempts to infect ESMB with the kind of partisan mutual-blackslapping-cum-dogpiling so common on other forums.

So, while it's understandable that someone enthusiastic about his 'group' will want to talk about it, and, even promote it, it's also a likely source of irritation for the public at large, and, it's wise for the person who sees the irritation on the rise to re-examine his own input and see if maybe he's being a leeetle too enthusiastic and monomanic.

ESMB is not your private army/recruiting-ground.

Zinj

Exactly.

Except for me.

ESMB is my private army/recruiting ground, and not yours.

 

[SchwimmelPuckel]

I won't even consider 'the tech' in this. But the 'movement' that is Scientology. With the goals of dominating all humankind.

The Freezone.. Alright I foresee the original Cult collapsing. When that happens there is the Freezone.. To continue the 'movement' that is based on the Dianetics 'mindtrap' and all the LRH scripture containing the conditioning for creating the monster that is CoS.

Ok, when I became a scientologist in 1979, arguably as early as 1973, I had the impression that scientologists would be very good and intelligent folks. These were people whom I relied upon to actually PROTECT humanity from mad mob idiocy like Nazism and Fascism. These were people who could NEVER get themselves or their group made stupid by 'authority' like demonstrated in the Milgram Experiment and The Stanford Prison Experiment. (I'm just slapping a link in about Stanford. Haven't seen this before, but looks good...)

Well, I din't take long for me to see clearly that Scientologists were going the way of Milgram, Stanford and all the superstitious whichunts of medieval religion.

Worse really.. Because I saw really smart and intelligent people falling for it. They became a new kind of fascists.. Industriously reinstating superstition that humankind had grown out of long since. They exasperated me. I had intlligent people telling me that all kinds of unprovable and hairbrained old voodoo was true, because Ron saw that as 'spiritual' and used it to explain his idea of the 'dwindeling spiral'. And to add insult to mayhem, institute a 'law' making it unethical to disbelieve!

Homo Novis indeed! - Try regressing back toward the dark ages..

When I view it that way the Freezone is as bad as CoS.

As I see this, the Freezone needs to ensure that they don't become a new Milgram experiment and end up looking like Gestapo. I don't know they can do it.

If they can't they will be resisted!

This is humankind needing to protect itself from the mechanics that is demonstrated in the two experiments I posted above. These mechanics has been demontrated in real life innumeral times. Every warlord in history showed us.

Hmm.. Other than that the Freezone doesn't bother me. At this time they are needed as a halfway point out of CoS.

I'd give the advice to be ENORMOUSLY ethical with the promotion though. Much more ethical than both CoS and your average wacuumcleaner vendor.

Don't ever do the 'Foot in the Door' caper.

Don't present freezone links as critical. Or any other trick to fool people to look.

Don't use inval of the potential customer. This makes it tricky to explain the Reactive Mind of course. Just make sure to point out that humankind is at the highest ever civilization in known history at this time. Humankind accomplished that without worrying or doing anything about the reactive mind or engrams.

 

[Axiom142]

So how does one accomplish that, Ax, making ESMB a non-recruiting ground while allowing alternative viewpoints?

What is "recruitment" on a message board but saying "I like BLIXO because blah blah blah; you might like it too."?

Paul

Good point Paul.

How do you allow free speech but prevent someone maliciously shouting ‘Fire!’ in a crowded auditorium?

I believe that there is a big difference between saying “This is what I believe, make up your own mind.” and, “This is what I believe, you should do it too. We’re having a seminar tomorrow at such-and-such a place. If you come along, it would really help with all those problems you obviously have.” etc.

I didn’t say it would be easy to do, I was just stating my position. But, ultimately this board is run by Emma and her moderators. If she feels the need, she has the power to spank some botties and send them home to mummy.

I don’t like censorship, but I do recognise that sometimes it may be necessary. I trust Emma’s judgement in this.

Axiom142

 

[Alanzo]

I guess I'd want to know why they were reading posts on a section or sub forum labelled "Freezone" or "Independent Field" and what they expected to find there.

Because they want to.

They want to go into that den of proselytizing mind-control brainwashers and free the inhabitants there.

It's huge fun and very therapeutic for some people after the cult to launch out on their next quixotic quest to free the world of Scientology Evangelism of Any Kind!

It's excellent. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. And it's also good to spot the thinking that had you entrapped for so long and expose it to others for what it is.

I highly recommend it!

If they weren't here, we couldn't do that.

 

[Boldgirl]

Good!

We need you, boldgirl!!

Where the hell have you been???

Lurking, reading still on the MB, and reading these books of healing to get my sanity back. Also I had an injury for 4 weeks that made typing too painful and no fun. But my fingers are back!

Thanks for noticing I was missing though!

 

[Voltaire's Child]

There is also an "LH" on the IFAchat yahoo group who was less than welcoming.

Just to confuse you all.

Emma,

It's an unfortunate thing, but there are some Freezoners who are quite RonBot'ish. I've seen it a number of times. Fewer and to a lesser degree but there are some Freezoners with whom I'd want no dealings and whom I do not respect because of it.

In all walks of life, paths, and so forth, you get extemists, nasty people, fanatics, and decent people and middle of the road types.

As you may or may not know (It got mentioned on another forum by some people and I don't know if you saw it) I was having little FZ get togethers in Seattle at a Starbucks some time back. One of the people attending- who actually was a pretty loosey goosey anything goes type in a lot of ways and who'd never even been IN CofS- said that he didn't want me to say any more criticism of CofS or Hubbard. It bothered him, it wasn't what he wanted to concentrate on.

Now, his is a viewpoint I don't share. I can't share that. But it does go to show you that in any mix of people you will get people who don't want to tolerate hearing various things and others who do but only to an extent and others who don't mind at all, ever.