IT Support

Joined

• started 60 topics
• posted 793 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by IT Support

• 
  22

  How many should partake this year at the memorial?

  by M.J. in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  how many should partake this year at the memorial?

  how many of the original anointed, whose number was "sealed" in 1935 would likely be alive today?.

  i've examined the general survival rate of people of this age group in the us.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  "How many should partake this year at the memorial?"

  16 million...??
• 
  115

  Funniest WT Pics.....

  by Preston in

  1. social
  2. humour

  i thought this was "bull" from night court when i was a kid.... .

  lucille ball?!

  ?...from "i love lucy"??!?!?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  Avishai / Quotes:

  I can't find any extra feet... !!
• 
  115

  Funniest WT Pics.....

  by Preston in

  1. social
  2. humour

  i thought this was "bull" from night court when i was a kid.... .

  lucille ball?!

  ?...from "i love lucy"??!?!?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  Here's the original version from the 1982 edition...
• 
  169

  Has Anyone Got Any Proof That The Society Monitors Apostate Web Sites?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i am extremely skeptical about this, yet people on this forum seem to talk about it as though it were a fact.

  so has anyone got any actual concrete proof?

  here are the reasons why i don't think they do:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  HS,

  The monitoring does not neccessarily take place in any of the Bethel's. As you know the WTS has many JW lawyers working for them outside of WTS premises.

  Absolutely, although it is interesting that in the two instances mentioned by WIS, the PC(s) that visited his site were clearly on WT's internal network.

  Now, WT's IT guys are pretty good and would almost certainly have known that a visitor's trail of pages viewed is recorded in web logs. And the last thing they would probably want would be to hand a propoganda coup to 'apostate web sites' by letting them know that they have been visited by WT.

  So it would make sense that any monitoring is done, either by Bethelites from PCs using a separate dial-up account, or (as you suggest) by monitors working outside of WT premises.

  What would be even more interesting--albeit practically impossible--to learn was whether the visitor to WIS' site was authorised to do so, or was investigating out his own interest. In which case, I wonder what became of the poor guy...
• 
  169

  Has Anyone Got Any Proof That The Society Monitors Apostate Web Sites?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i am extremely skeptical about this, yet people on this forum seem to talk about it as though it were a fact.

  so has anyone got any actual concrete proof?

  here are the reasons why i don't think they do:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  Re: wtbts.org

  As we know, WT uses watchtower.org as the address of their public-facing web site. However, I think you will find that WT uses Microsoft Windows 2000 Server to run their official networks, which requires a domain name to identify itself, and, for their internal network, that is wtbts.org.

  Each server on the network is therefore named <server_name>.wtbts.org. Each user's official email address is <user_name>@wtbts.org.

  This is in contrast with Bethelites who have a PC in their rooms: they have to connect their modems to the phone sockets in their rooms, and arrange their own dialup Internet access, just like any other member of the public.

  Therefore, if a Bethelite had Internet access from his work PC and visited a web site, their web logs would show the IP number of WT's proxy server. If that same Bethelite went up to his or her room and visited the same web site from their personal PC, their web logs would show the (usually, temporary) IP number assigned to them when they logged on to the Internet.

  So, for WIS' web logs to show a visitor coming from srv1.wtbts.org, we can deduce a number of things:

  • srv1 must be the name of (one of?) their proxy server(s);
  • the user must have been accessing the Internet from their work PC;
  • as only a very small minority of WT users have Internet access--we know how paranoid the GB is about the Internet!!--the user that visited WIS must have been senior, must have been trusted with Internet access, and must have been visiting the site in his official capacity. (The proxy server logs are regularly scanned for evidence of illicit surfing.)

  This does not answer the question how regularly the 'apostate' web sites are monitored by WT. Perhaps Simon may care to check his web logs for evidence of WT visitations. Of course, if WT wished to conceal these visits, they could easily tell those doing that job to use their personal PCs in their rooms: then the IP numbers would be virtually anonymous.
• 
  58

  Does the WTS's past matter?

  by M.J. in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i know, i'd jump into this topic by saying, "heck yeah.

  they're the ones saying they've been appointed by god based on what they were doing back around 1914-1919.

  " but i'm trying to help someone out who has reached a roadblock with his wife.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  M.J.

  Interesting thread. I've enjoyed the various thoughts.

  She has accepted the fact that like any human or human organization, mistakes are made and that JWs have acknowledged these mistakes.

  For me, why it matters is that they have not acknowledged their past mistakes, or in the few instances where they have, they try to put a 'spin' on it to say that they weren't wrong, it was just the way Jehovah was leading them at the time.

  Then there are their blatant lies about their past, again to try to put themselves in a good light to the majority of JWs who know no better.

  So, the past mistakes on their own do not make them a false religion, but out of their own mouths they condemn themselves by their present dishonesty over their past mistakes.
• 
  13

  How can I find out what my standing in the Org is?

  by lv4fer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  there was never an announcement made.

  i wrote them a letter not a da letter, but essentially i told them that me and my family simply wanted to "cease to be involved with the faith" at the time on their web site it said that you would not be shunned if you simply ceased to be involved with the faith.

  i also said if they made an announcement that i would sue them for slander.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  This is the official WT policy:

  If the sinful conduct is known only to believing family members and no congregation action is taken because of the factors outlined above, believing relatives will likely determine to curtail family association severely, viewing the relative as bad association. (1 Cor. 15 :33)

  ("Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock" Unit 5 (a) pp. 99-100)

  So even if someone is not d/f or d/a, they can still be 'informally' shunned.
• 
  34

  Blood Transfusions Kill Patients, Say Doctors

  by JW Ben in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  blood transfusions kill patients, say doctors .

  (picture: your health daily logo) february 11 1999

  london (nyt syndicate) -- blood transfusions given routinely to tens of thousands of critically ill patients may be killing them, doctors have found.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  Hey guys, go easy on the lad: he's confused, he's having doubts, and he's fighting them. We've all been there. It's far better to help Ben than to frighten him off.

  JWBen,

  The quote you posted made some valid points, but so did the pervious posters.

  Nobody here is saying (I think!) that blood is a panacea and it's perfectly safe. It's not, and it isn't.

  A blood transfusion is a medical procedure that carries risks, just like every medical procedure (e.g. having a general anaesthetic, taking medicine, etc.). Doctos will usually only recommend any procedure if the risks are far outweighed by the benefits.

  So before you judge a procedure, you need accurate information about the risks and benefits (and don't be fobbed off with the nonsense that's in WT publications--do your own research on the web on the many reputable medical sites).

  Only when you have that information can you made a reasoned judgment, both on the procudure itself and then on the quality of WT's information that you may have previously relied on.

  Personally, although I now totally reject virtually all I learned from WT, I would prefer not to have a blood transfusion unless as a very last resort, if my life depended on it. But then again, others may decide differently for themselves.

  The main point, I guess, is that nobody should have the authority over your free will to tell you to sacrifice your life to their reasoning and their beliefs...

  Keep searching, keep questioning...
• 
  24

  February 28th and My Dad.

  by Englishman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it'll be 21 years ago since my dad died.. i remember it vividly.

  i got into work to find a message to ring my mum urgently.

  she told me he'd had a massive cardiac infarction and died at 9.30 that morning.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  Eman,

  It's always sad to remember those we've lost.

  It's even worse to think of what good they might have accomplished if they'd not got involved in this terrible cult...

  Best wishes.
• 
  12

  JW's campaign of intimidation

  by IT Support in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  (http://www.thestar.com/nasapp/cs/contentserver?pagename=thestar/layout/article_type1&c=article&cid=1109027411614&call_pageid=.

  http://www.thestar.com/nasapp/cs/contentserver?pagename=thestar/layout/article_type1&c=article&cid=1109027411614&call_pageid=.

  http://quotes.watchtower.ca

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  IT Support

  SNG,

  Great letter.

  This is an important site because the Watchtower Society tries very hard to obscure changes in doctrine and failed predictions that have occurred over the years.

  Good point.

  I was trying to keep it under their 300-word limit.

  Damn, I missed that!