Public Shaming of ex-scientologists ...

[I told you I was trouble]

... demanding or exposing names, details and judging people in general for past cult involvement.

Does it help expose the cult or just make the people who were involved run in the opposite direction though possibly already filled with guilt and remorse?

I believe it serves no purpose other than to make the accuser feel better about themselves because they are finally 'standing up' (though sometimes anonymously) and drawing attention to things that were non-optimum and possibly even illegal.

If they stood up at the time of any of the many horrendous cult happenings (and especially when children were involved) I applaud them, I truly do ... but if they have waited for years before doing so, I really don't.

We all seem to want the cult crushed because there's no doubt that it's nasty at heart, but attacking people personally on the internet is not the way to go about it unless you have facts, were personally involved and are willing to stand up in a court of law to defend your accusations.

Come at me Bro! (actually don't bother ... I'm likely to call you a troll and nobody wants to see that because apparently it's not very nice ... whereas publicly shaming people who are probably not here to defend themselves is fine).

Before you point it out @Alanzo ... I haven't started threads here because I've never felt the need to, nothing I have to say couldn't be said elsewhere but for some reason this bothers me ... if you want to take credit for 'waking me up' please do so but it is more to do with the embarrassment I'm currently feeling about the general direction ESMB is going in than anything else.

 

[lotus]

attacking people personally on the internet is not the way to go about it unless you have facts, were personally involved and are willing to stand up in a court of law to defend your accusations.

Ditto sis!
(You spoke your mind well)

I also am very embarrassed

​

 

[Helena Handbasket]

Or better yet, tell the other guy's story, but change the name(s) and other identifying characteristics.

Helena

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

This is a good question Trouble, but I take a different view. I know this is an emotive issue for some people, and they may be better off not reading what comes next.

I think sometimes people need to vent, and depending on the circumstances that may involve naming the people whom you think were culpable; maybe not doing so on Twitter, but on here.

I had a comparatively good time in the CofS but even so I was left with a considerable amount of anger against certain people whom I won't name (for now anyway). You talk about people who were filled with guilt and remorse, and fair enough; what if they aren't filled with guilt and remorse, and use your and others' silence as "proof" that they did the right thing?

I think Emma was justified in calling out the ED of her org yesterday. Also, that Sheila was justified in naming that nasty piece of work she had to deal with when she was at AOLA.

Hopefully we can get to a place where we're filled with compassionate understanding for the people we had to deal with in the CofS, but that may take you through some rocky places first. I don't think it's realistic to imagine that we can start out from that place.

P.S. If anyone thinks that seeing too much vituperation would put people off joining up here; maybe we need a "hell subforum" (as I've seen on other boards) where people can let off steam to their heart's content, away from the main board. You could even make it private and not accessible to the main membership.

 

[lotus]

I think there are 2 different situations mentionned here:

• 1) public shaming of ex-scientologists critics as being the purpose ( no fact telling)
• 2) telling one's story involving proeminent ex-scientologists (providing with facts)

The motive, goals are not the same , neither the result. I never seen anyone blamed here for mentioning a fact that happened to him\her or that he\she was involved in. Reporting assumptions and generalities for facts to be believed is an attempt to harm.

For example telling my story and naming the C\S who fucked with my case vs naming the same C\S and tell he committed crimes and fucked up many cases and going on and on and on for weeks, months and year...

One is a sain process , the other is not.

Also, when crimes are alleged, the place to go is to the police or either go with a civil suit. But message boards shall not substitute to justice court .

 

[Alanzo]

Also, when crimes are alleged, the place to go is to the police or either go with a civil suit. But message boards shall not substitute to justice court .

This thread is a great example of the blind hypocrisy that has ruled ESMB for almost a decade. ESMB has engaged in the public shaming of Ex-Scientologists continually - throughout its history. But the Ex-Scientologists who got shamed were the ones that Karen wanted shamed. First she didn't want Marty shamed. So you quit. Then she did, so you started up again.

I have such contempt for that kind of sheeplike behavior. Perhaps you've noticed. I never thought Exes could become so sheeplike. But the last few weeks have been an eye-opening experience for me.

Emma has made it very clear that the days when you can tell people what to say and what not to say on ESMB are over.

Whether ESMBers "vent", or write what you want written, in the way you want written, can not be controlled by you any more. You can not say who everyone else should be loyal to, or which Ex needs to be vilified and shamed, and which Ex should not.

Karen is never coming back to tell you what to think or say any more.

I believe that some of you miss her control over you. Go to Outer Banks where she can control you again.

Apparently sheep need a shepherd.

 

[Bill]

This thread is a great example of the blind hypocrisy that has ruled ESMB for almost a decade. ESMB has engaged in the public shaming of Ex-Scientologists continually - throughout its history. But the Ex-Scientologists who got shamed were the ones that Karen wanted shamed. First she didn't want Marty shamed. So you quit. Then she did, so you started up again.

I have such contempt for that kind of sheeplike behavior. Perhaps you've noticed. I never thought Exes could become so sheeplike. But the last few weeks have been an eye-opening experience for me.

Emma has made it very clear that the days when you can tell people what to say and what not to say on ESMB are over.

Whether ESMBers "vent", or write what you want written, in the way you want written, can not be controlled by you any more. You can not say who everyone else should be loyal to, or which Ex needs to be vilified and shamed, and which Ex should not.

Karen is never coming back to tell you what to think or say any more.

I believe that some of you miss her control over you. Go to Outer Banks where she can control you again.

Apparently sheep need a shepherd.

Alanzo,

Karen isn't here. All your anger, anguish and hate is misplaced. You are attacking people who are not Karen.

Please get help. All this anger isn't healthy.

 

[Lurker5]

need poop icon for the interbulator's raging anger tirade

in meantime

 

[Free Being Me]

Every once in a while I think this post needs to be quoted (emphasis added by me). I'll leave it here.

Ok, yes----I post occassionally on Marty's board. Some of you may wonder: Why?
Well, there's a little thing in the OSA manual called their bible, "The Art of War".
In it Sun Tzu says a few key things that OSA uses, all the time:
1) Master Sun
"Cause division amongst them" (page 54)
2) Cao Cao
"Send interlopers to cause rifts amongst them"
3) Meng Shi
"Strike at their gaps, attack when they are lax, don't let the enemy figure out how to prepare.This is why it is said in military operations that formlessness is the most effective. One of the great warrior-leaders said, "The most efficient of movements is the one that is unexpected; the best of plans is the one that is unknown".
Which is why I believe Anonymous has been so very successful. Also, once I noticed there was this huge division amongst Critics, Marty and Anonymous, I looked at who that supported, and decided to try being in more communication, not less.
Does that mean we all need to agree? Hell no, and no, we won't either. However, can we all just agree to disagree, and keep our attentions focused on key issues we all agree on, such as the abuses of C of $? Imnsho--to me that's our best and most effective mode of operation. Even if you don't agree with this, my suggestion is try to post more FACTS about the organization known as the "church" of Scientology and their abuses that we all know, but MANY new people do not. People are leaving daily. They don't need to step out into this collision of views between people they thought were going to help them, or at least be supportive of them.
I speak from experience on this one....and I'm telling you, it's a VERY key time for people. They need you, or anyone they find safe. If it's ESMB or OCMB--fantastic. If it's WWP---also excellent. If that's Marty or Mike--that's great, too. They've helped a bunch of new people wake up and leave, and many speak out, also. Good for them! And on top of that, all (from all 4 groups) have helped educate *tons* of people about these very abuses. Yeah!
They're (new people) out, and that's #1 great. #2 is hopefully they'll feel safe enough to speak out.
For people calling each other criminals, please let me remind you of the 3 goals of the Top Secret OSA Int Internet gang, re the Net:

1) Distract off of any topic having to do with anything they don't want known.

I understand people *want* Marty and Mike to say more. Ok, fair enough. Do you think calling them criminals will motivate them to say more, or less?
Try to think of yourself in a similar position. Which would help you be motivated more?
I know for myself, at first I thought of M & M, and not really knowing them personally, just felt they were separate--as it is a bit of a closed group, or so it seemed. I realized I'd never even tried to communicate with that group---and I did, and it's been far different than I thought. Then I really looked at my own personal views, and I have always said I am speaking out against the abuses, the Human Rights Violations of C of $, which they all are against, also. I believe people have a right to believe whatever they want. The information is out there, and some shall look at it, some may never. I ~think~we all can at least agree that the abuses are # 1.

2) Degrade any and ALL activists exposing any thing they (DM and gang) don't want known.

Hello? Perhaps we've all gotten a bit blase' about Davey boy beating people up, but until this either STOPS or serious Justice occurs, it hasn't been said enough, imnsho. **Tons** of people have zero clue about this, so every TV show done is good for all of us.
(and unless you've done TV shows, my view is don't start calling others names or ragging on them for not doing enough). Try to keep in mind: We all unravel at different speeds.

3) Slime any public area, so people literally are embarrassed to even post there.

The above was told to me a few weeks before I quit that group, forever.
I hope that helps. While "in" C of $, at the next to the top, I found exclusion rampant, and it sucked.
I'm interested in inclusion, and connections.
I believe we all have things we can share and it's important we respect each other,
and help each other. God knows we all have been through enough! May we have more of this: >>>not this:
My love to you all.

Tory/Magoo

Scientology OSA Int Internet Top Secret Mafia Explained by Tory Magoo
(How $cio-trolls work on the net)​

 

[PirateAndBum]

This thread is a great example of the blind hypocrisy that has ruled ESMB for almost a decade. ESMB has engaged in the public shaming of Ex-Scientologists continually - throughout its history. But the Ex-Scientologists who got shamed were the ones that Karen wanted shamed. First she didn't want Marty shamed. So you quit. Then she did, so you started up again.

I have such contempt for that kind of sheeplike behavior. Perhaps you've noticed. I never thought Exes could become so sheeplike. But the last few weeks have been an eye-opening experience for me.

Emma has made it very clear that the days when you can tell people what to say and what not to say on ESMB are over.

Whether ESMBers "vent", or write what you want written, in the way you want written, can not be controlled by you any more. You can not say who everyone else should be loyal to, or which Ex needs to be vilified and shamed, and which Ex should not.

Karen is never coming back to tell you what to think or say any more.

I believe that some of you miss her control over you. Go to Outer Banks where she can control you again.

Apparently sheep need a shepherd.

If we are so in need of a shepherd, then why are we rejecting your determined shepherding?

Thanks so much for calling us sheep. That makes me feel all warm and cozy.

Retread: How To Win Friends & Influence People

 

[ILove2Lurk]

Whether ESMBers "vent", or write what you want written, in the way you want written, can not be controlled by you any more.

I would suggest this advice to anyone who participates in a blog . . . or a marriage, or a life for that matter.

You really don't need to write (or say aloud) every thought that comes into your head. Best not to.

Judicious selection of content is the best way to go for a happy relationship or life. That is, if happiness
and contentment is the goal.
For some, it's not.

 

[Alanzo]

I would suggest this advice to anyone who participates in a blog . . . or a marriage, or a life for that matter.

You really don't need to write (or say aloud) every thought that comes into your head. Best not to.

Judicious selection of content is the best way to go for a happy relationship or life. That is, if happiness
and contentment is the goal.
For some, it's not.

You can have friends, or you can have the truth.

But, too often, you can't have both.

In this space where no one really knows anyone else, and where there are all kinds of back-channel campaigns going on, getting at the truth, such as getting at the truth of Mike Rinder, will lose you friends.

Oh well.

 

[lotus]

If we are so in need of a shepherd, then why are we rejecting your determined shepherding?

Thanks so much for calling us sheep. That makes me feel all warm and cozy.

Retread: How To Win Friends & Influence People

You refuse a volunteer shepherd???

 

[lotus]

A quick interlude paid by Eli Lyli

Relax and play: " Where is Waldo???"

 

[Dotey OT]

A quick interlude paid by Eli Lili

Relax and play: " Where is Waldo???"

Hey, is there anyone here around I can blindly and without question follow? I'm looking for a tribal leader to tell me I'm wrong for being out of the cherch.

 

[Bill]

You can have friends, or you can have the truth.

But, too often, you can't have both.

In this space where no one really knows anyone else, and where there are all kinds of back-channel campaigns going on, getting at the truth, such as getting at the truth of Mike Rinder, will lose you friends.

Oh well.

Really? "Back-channel campaigns"? Specifically who? Really, enough of these vague accusations and conspiracy theories, WHO?

 

[Dotey OT]

Now I'm waiting for eighteen new threads:

1. "How to be a great ex-scientologist in five easy lessons." Charge cards accepted.

2. "How to always click on the links to my blog so that I can capture your info, and be even better than I am now."

3. "How to be an even gooder ex-scientologist in five easy lessons."

4. "Look at how fucked up Mike Rinder is."

5. "Look at how fucked up Mike Rinder is Part 2."

6. "Look at how fucked up Mike Rinder is Part 3."

Etc., etc., etc.

 

[Dotey OT]

I think we need an ex-exorcism. (Notice a sly play there, of pre-fixes)

And for your daily vague movie reference:

"The power of Christ compels you!"

"The power of Christ compels you!"

"The power of Christ compels you!"

Anyone seen my holy water?

 

[cleared cannibal]

You can have friends, or you can have the truth.

But, too often, you can't have both.

In this space where no one really knows anyone else, and where there are all kinds of back-channel campaigns going on, getting at the truth, such as getting at the truth of Mike Rinder, will lose you friends.

Oh well.

I have found this to be true also.

If you espouse your true thoughts and beliefs and they don't coincide with another's it usually causes friction in the relationship. It seems it is a rare individual that can accept another person's ideas which are in disagreement with ones own w/o trying to change the other. If the change is unsuccessful the the relationship is damaged.

 

[Glenda]

Inter-bloody-mission!

Some of us are seeking a new guru in their lives. Can you please keep the noise level down a bit while I try and focus on the research I am wading through. This is an important decision. I am tired of thinking for myself. Tired, ya know. (I'd putting the yawn smilie thing here but I can't find the damn thing and I am too lazy to try harder to find it)

I am wicked and lazy. Don't you just want to save me.

I open up my mouth and air comes rushing out.