AAWA, J M____ E______, and me

by zed is dead 577 Replies latest members private

  • Aussie Oz
    Aussie Oz

    This is the single most inane waste of time going in circles thread i have ever ever ever seen on JWN

    In 23 pages of evidence and aplogetics this is the best they relay via Marvin?

    1. From what I’m told, there was ''apparently'' a ''misplaced presumption'' at work from the AAWA side of this incident, and therein lay a ''systemic flaw''.

    2. Another ''systemic flaw'' at work was ''too much spontaneity'' among the AAWA ''volunteer staff structure''.

    What a crock of weasal word propaganda, I swear if i didnt know better i was reading a quote from the watchtower!

    ALL EVERYONE WANTED TO KNOW IS WHY THEY DIDN'T JUST SHUT THE FB SITE DOWN WHEN THE PROBLEM FIRST BECAME APPARENT.

    Had AAWA actualy done that, and had the conviction to just admit the mistake they would have kept what credibility they had. Now, that is ashes. An activist organization headed by loose cannons and a fake name that few will ever trust again and as far as the target will be concerned...probably just a laughing stock that will be mocked at the next round of conventions.

    Oz who is thanking his lucky stars that he didnt 'join'.

  • besty
    besty

    @marvin

    What have I attempted to obfuscate?

    erm - the word 'obfuscate' was disputed by you - see the irony? rather than addressing the substance of the issue you decided to address the way i used a single word. (multiple people on this thread agree that your style on this thread has been obfuscatory)

    Is there something asked of me I’ve failed to answer?

    Yes - this:

    @ Marvin Shillmore - Given your hotline to AAWA please simply ask Julia Barrick Douglas, Jo Buel Jensen and J Mason Emerson whether they sought consent from the 800 people they added.
  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    It was me who used the phrase "without consent". But honestly, who really doubts these people were added "without consent"? Unless you are being willfully dense, or Marvin Shilmer. For goodness sake, what a colossal waste of time.

  • besty
    besty

    Its beyond reasonable doubt for me.

    Marvin should explain why it is not beyond reasonable doubt for him, and also why he appears unwilling to ask AAWA if there was consent.

    Quick recap on the evidence:

    1 - Multiple people have have said they were added without consent

    2 - Facebook makes it easy to do, so much so that its highly doubtful separate consent for 800 people could be sought by just 3 people in the short time this all happened

    3 - Julia Barrick Douglas hasn't denied it, just slammed me on the AAWA facebook page.

  • Marvin Shilmer
    Marvin Shilmer

    -

    “It was me who used the phrase "without consent". But honestly, who really doubts these people were added "without consent"? Unless you are being willfully dense, or Marvin Shilmer. For goodness sake, what a colossal waste of time.”

    slimboyfat,

    Yes. It was you.

    When I made inquiry Besty jumped in exclaiming what you asserted was said by him. I couldn’t find where he said it. But according to Besty, he said what you attributed to him.

    ....fast forward...

    Now after wasting a bunch of my time trying to find where Besty said what apparently he never said, Besty limps in telling me his initial response was said of a part of the whole I inquired about. Well thanks so much for settling this several thousands of keyboard strikes later. That's very kind of you, Besty, and you too, slimboyfat.

    When I ask a precise question I take answers accordingly. It’s disgusting to me that people can so cavalierly waste other folks time.

    I came into this discussion in an honest effort to figure out what was going on and whether I wanted to work with people inside AAWA. Look at the grief handed me. What is the point? I’m not here to make anyone happy. I’m not here to make friends. I’m here to help whoever I can along the way, but primarily I’m here to figure out whether people inside AAWA are people I want to work with, whether as part of AAWA or otherwise.

    It’s apparent to me folks have been hurt. I can’t change that and am not here attempting to.

    In your case, slimboyfat, though I know you’re a good guy, you have culpability in wasting some of my time. I’m here of my own volition, but my own sense of decency compels me to do whatever is in my power to avoid wasting any of the very precious and finite time of a fellow human being. I don’t know about you. But my clock is nearer the end than the beginning. I still have a lot of work to get done in my life, and wasting time really burns. This is why I bother to ask precisely questions, even if it does add to the sentence, Besty.

    For now I’m staying in touch with folks inside AAWA to see what happens and where it goes. If I learn something of potential help I’ll surely share it. In the meantime I recommend folks take initiative to make firsthand inquiry. What you get from my conversations with people at AAWA is secondhand. Though secondhand information can be examined for veracity, there is nothing like firsthand information.

    None of this changes a thing about how I feel of participants in this discussion. But what I say above underscores the difficulty of trying to sort out useful information in discussions in this forum, and why asking precise questions is important to the process.

    Marvin Shilmerr

  • Marvin Shilmer
    Marvin Shilmer

    -

    “…But honestly, who really doubts these people were added "without consent"?” (Emphasis added by Marvin Shilmer)

    slimboyfat,

    After researching the veracity of claims, I have no doubt whatsoever that people were added without consent. But this does not confirm the extent.

    My initial question posed to you had to do with an assertion that hundreds of people were added without consent. I’ve found no evidence this was the case. It could be. But I’m unwilling to say something is true unless I have evidence that is the case.

    I have evidence in hand that at least three individuals were added without consent. Undoubtedly there are others too. But whether this number extends to hundreds is unknown to me though the potential for this was (is?) present.

    Of time

    Another colossal waste of people’s time is exaggeration. Perhaps claiming hundreds were added without consent is not an exaggeration, and perhaps it is. I don’t know. What I do know is no one, including you, has so far been able to evidence this extent.

    None of my participation here has been said to upset anyone. All of my participation here has been to settle my own future course in relation to individuals inside AAWA leadership, and if possible to help folks along the way by sharing information.

    Not that I care, but I think an objective reader would conclude I’ve been spat upon for my trouble. I suppose it’s all part of navigating and getting along inside the nest we call humanity. I’m glad I’m here, above ground and still able to feel.

    Marvin Shilmer

  • brinjen
    brinjen

    How many people on here who can say they joined voluntarily? Takers?

  • zed is dead
    zed is dead

    I just found out about another force add. A former JWN moderator and personal friend, "AK-Jeff," was added to the group without consent or knowledge. He didn't check until I asked him to. He gave me his permission to share this with JWN.

    My investigation is going well. I wonder how the internal investigation at AAWA is doing? And I wonder how many of the force adds still don't know they have been compromised?

    Many people have been hurt, and the only thing AAWA had to do to prevent this is to delete their Facebook group. They have left it up for 3 weeks now.

    zed

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Three weeks. Disgraceful.

    And sorry Marvin but I'm not going to let you waste any more of my time.

  • zed is dead
    zed is dead

    Marvin,

    You and AAWA wasted a lot of peoples time. Don't blame Besty or SBF.

    zed

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit