It really depends on if you want to make waves or not, and whether or not you desire any contact from active JWs, from friends to close relatives. Disassociation and Disfellowshipping carry the same level of punishment. However, disassociation indicates that you voluntarily resigned and (so JWs would think) intentionally created a barrrier between you and the congregation. Being disfellowshipped leaves the lines more ambiguous, as people often speculate internally on what happened. Perhaps you didn't want this result? It's the age old argument of "They didn't fire me, I quit!". If there is satisfaction to be gained from knowing that, then great. But a DA letter is a very serious thing to do, as you will be burning many bridges. Some of these bridges might not have to have been burned in the first place. I've seen many come back from a DFing (myself included), but I have never seen a DA being reversed. A DA letter or stunt is great theatre, just be absolutely certain you wish to be the star of that particular show. Personally I prefer my privacy and keeping my truest feelings known to only people I can trust to keep them in confidence.
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
JoinedPosts by Las Malvinas son Argentinas
-
8
For anybody who is going to dissassociate.......
by EndofMysteries ini haven't officially because of family.
but i see many times on this board those who do it it and write a letter to send a message.
(hoping it gets the elders reading it to think).
-
-
-
28
A real difficult congregation???
by quellycatface inmyself and my family have had some odd experiences in our current congregation.
i have'nt been to meetings since september because of this.. 1. the co told the elder who was studying with my husband that he was doing it as an "academic exercise.
" my husband is very intelligent, been in the military, has a degree and a masters and a good job.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
That's the problem with the JWs. They are the worst place for people with mental conditions and chronic depression. Instead of pushing you toward getting real help in these struggles, they exacerbate the problems by guilting you into going into field service. That's the last thing you need.
If you haven't already, go to a physician and get diagnosed. Get on medication and present your 'doctor's note' to the elders. They are not going to like it much, but my guess is that they'll ease up on the pressure if you confront them with something like that.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
I guess one cannot be from South America and speak English at native or near native fluency.
No, I didn't say I could read your thoughts. You betrayed your inner thoughts by hinting at what you were thinking and your overall thought processes.
OK, so it's wrong in either instance. But whereas you'd have the moral authority to judge me, you'd unilaterally pass at the chance of judging someone else who had more of a reason. Isn't deciding who gets the blame and who does for doing the exact same thing being presumptuous? Whoever gave you that authority?
I think I've heard it all about efforts to harm him. He goes by an alias and had a thick cloud around him, which until recently he did everything to perpetuate. It was said on a related thread that only a handful of trusted people had his phone number and knew who he was. Even today after he has 'come out', no one can really identify him. So let's say the WT got wind of it here that he wasn't real but was the president of AAWA. Then let's say that they filed a complaint and started legal proceedings against AAWA. One thing leads to another and one of their demands is "Who is John Cedars?'. Guess what? No one outside his inner circle could identify him. No one is going to go get him. They don't have a special FBI plane that is going to go scoop an anonymous poster who started up an anti-WT group and incorporated it. The only person who'd really be on the hook would be Kelly, and I'd say that he'd deserve it for filing false info to begin with. I don't and didn't wish that calamity to befall them, yet I wouldn't have a whole lot of sympathy for them either. It's like the friend who was nabbed for shoplifting. I'm not going to flag down a security officer, but at the same time she deserves what is coming. All this bickering is clouding the fact that what I and other accused him of happened to be correct. If it wasn't then I'd be among those who'd admit they thought wrong.
But we weren't wrong. As it happened, AAWA figured it out and thought enough of it to post about it on their site that all board members were real. But it's the messenger, the message, and the impolite way it was being conveyed.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
Who brought up that Cedars was unpopular? He had his notable defenders, and yes, they were quite vocal in their defence of him. I'm afraid you have fallen for the common ex-JW meme that people really give a [poop] about us. AAWA? I doubt they were losing any sleep in Brooklyn. Same thing with Cedars. What I do take issue with is your stance that anyone not affected negatively by AAWA does not have a reason to 'harm' him. You stated earlier that you wouldn't have any problem with someone who was harmed by him or AAWA doing the same thing as I was doing online. So this is your hangup? So it's wrong for me to try to harm him, but it's perfectly alright with you if someone his organisation has outed had done the same thing? It's either right or it's wrong to 'harm' someone. It also betrays your own inner thoughts that if it would be OK for such a person to do so, then what I was saying in forum couldn't have been all that bad to begin with. If it were that harmful and he had a realistic chance of getting into trouble because of a bunch of loudmouths, then why would it be OK for someone else to do the same thing? Are you advocating vengeance?
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
I did not use that defence. I created a hypothetical scenario where I assumed you were right about me trying to harm him. The first sentence should have clued you in. If you bothered to read further into what I was saying, you would have realised that I fully endorse what I view as my right to discuss this in forum. Within this realm you would have noticed my pointed comment about why I personally am being singled out for your condemnation. The answer always comes back to me as you and me have exchanged words before and you felt you had a score to settle. You couldn't settle it in forum or PMs, so you are doing so now long after the fact.
What does my claim to not be 'anti-activist' have anything to do with the AAWA alias issue? I am not anti-activist. I am against people using a non-profit status under a fictitious name, as well as an overall aversion to shady business practices, which I thought of this as.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
What kind of logic is that? So someone needs to be personally aggrieved by something to have the right to speak out about it? Glad you weren't around during the Holocaust.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
OK then, let's say for a second that I did try to harm him by saying that in forum. Just to amuse you. Do you realise that you have just accused many others of doing the same thing to him, unless you think that I was the only one bringing it up. As I said before, this did not originate with me. So you are saying that you had and have a problem with everyone who brought this subject up in forum? There were quite a few you know. That brings me back to why you chose not to call me (and others) out at the time of the discussion besides your turd comment. You said you thought we were incorrect at the time. Well were we? OK, no go on that one, so let's go to the messenger... Wait, let's choose one in particular (me) that you have had words with before and have sent angry PMs to in the past on a different matter. I think you are giving the WTS way too little credit to think that there are WT spies just ready to pounce on an idea forwarded by a poster here. If they had a problem with AAWA and wanted to bring it down, they would have done so easily, and with no help from us. This was all public record. In fact, the first thing they probably did in Brooklyn was to look at the public records and find out who was behind this organisation. Richard Kelly? Check. Barbara Anderson? Check. Known apostates. John Cedars? Who the hell is that? Well, let's use this Google tool and find out. So this is a fake name he is using! It doesn't take a whole lot of sleuthing to figure that one out. What we were trying to do was get him to resign his position before the WTS noticed. While there was still time. When he could still realistically say 'aw shucks, I didn't know about Arizona law, in fact I'm not even American'. So if you want to say that I was trying to harm him singlehanded by agreeing with what others were saying about the issue and by using public records that anyone could look at, then you got me.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
If I knew that she was cheating on her taxes, would my dislike of things she's posted here justify me going to the authorities to turn her in, even if I knew that she would never find out that it was me who turned her in?
You still don't get it. No one to my knowledge turned him in or seriously threatened to turn him in. You still cling to your false analogy that talking about it heatedly in forum is the same as turning him in. It's not. HUGE difference between talking about it and out and about ratting on him to the authorities.
He should have never put himself in that position. Maybe it wasn't his call, but it still reeks of horrible judgment to use a fictitious name on a legal incorporation document.
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
A marathon runner when you are doing the exact same thing, only that you are just repeating the same things over and over again. Who ever said I am 'running from my conduct'? It's all right there. What I was saying at the time was also in line with what several others on both sides were saying (for your reference, this was right around the time you said our advice was like your turds). So by my conduct I was intentionally trying to cause him harm? So now you can read minds? How do you know what my motives are? I have stated them for the record, but you keep glossing them over and claiming I am either changing the subject, personally attacking you or cedars, or whatever else you are thinking at this time. If you want to embrace the Cedars label then by all means, do so. His train has left and you hardly have any posse of your own. As for my name, I would prefer to be left in a category by myself. But you know, I can't and wont force anyone to acceed to my wishes.
So to your tired old point that I tried to harm Cedars: He did it himself. He signed papers or had people willingly sign them for him that were fictitious. He didn't need me to harm him. He was doing quite a fine job of that himself. I reserve the right to call him and his organisation out on things that I knew to be illegal in forum. It is not up to you to tell me differently. Site management could have shut it down, but they did not. If they did not think it necessary to shut down conversation about the whole alias business, then why should we take you as a moral authority on it?
-
178
Honest survey question on effectiveness of 'apostacy'
by Simon init seems like lots of people have big dreams of 'destroying the watchtower'.
it's usually linked to a story of how they were wronged and want some revenge.
do these 'in your face' attempts to convince people that the truth isn't the truth really have an effect?.
-
-
Las Malvinas son Argentinas
You have a very Cedars-esque way of saying that others are either a) not answering the question or b) changing the subject when you are clearly not having any effect in convincing anyone of your point. Please keep in mind that I did not solicit anything from you, yet you sent me two PMs calling me a coward for my initial idea of fading. Physician heal thyself. Don't get on your high horse and lecture me about being mean or vindictive.
Ok back to the 'subject'. I've been answering it the entire time but unfortunately you are too obtuse to read into it. Cedars gives it and takes it and he has plenty of threads where he has tried to bully people into being silent and/or agreeing with him. My posts weren't so much about him personally, but at AAWA in general and the pompous attitude he had as president of that organisation. But if you must know, I found him to be a real ass when you took a position contrary to his. Live by the sword, die by the sword. You don't get to run ramshod around this forum thinking you own the goddamn place and not expect to get some sort of blowback. Cedars for his part keeps on bringing up my name and then expresses surprise when I respond. I had let it go, but he kept it up by bringing me into it, as he has done twice on his FB thread
You, for your part, just can't get over the fact that we have had words before and you did not like the outcome of it. Which is perfectly fine, I hardly think it's anything worth going over again. But it's hard to escape the inevitable conclusion that you've been waiting to strike back at me. Guess what? You got it right back, pal.