"Oh, I must add this thought.
>IF (the big "IF") the book were the least bit successful, the WTS would probably crack down
>on fading. There could be new rules about disassociating continously inactive ones.
>I don't think so highly of myself causing so much change, but it is possible if more people
>were moved to fade, based on a book.
>Okay, you can all tell me how I think a little too highly of my work now.
" Being a writer requires a little self delusion, especially since we're getting rejected a lot more than accepted...so confidence, even a little bloated confidence, i think that defines a writer...writers who don't have it i don't consider writers.
regarding your big IF, i think there are more possibilities than just the wtbts cracking down on fading....b/c the wtbts seems to be a little more concerned about their public opinion, so if your book is a success and there were blanket crackdown, it would be an opportunity to get way more press for your book, swing some educated bad press at the wtbts and they may just let some gay guy do a kiss ass documentary on them. (oh wait, they already did that.)
but i understand your concern and you have my respect for protecting individuals who don't want to shake things up. i suggest writing it anyway, you can always choose not to pursue publishing it...and many people will choose not to publish it for you....but it sounds like an important piece of work.
">By the way, if they do ever decide to disassociate continuous inactive ones, just report >one hour of field service every 6 months. You could even mail it in, since you never go to the >hall. HEE HEE."LMFAO, ok, please finish the book, this is brilliant!
i need to figure a better way to quote people here. :)