I left in '03; my memory is there was a yearning for "reform" among the rank and file, and especially among many elders I spoke with. But no one would say anything publicly because the WTS was quick to act on any kind of criticism, even the constructive kind. And for good reason, based on my experience:
For some years I had a secular job with a publishing company writing/editing a community newsletter for a client. Sometimes a story would appear that dealt with political or public affairs. I was asked occasionally by some of the "friends" if that was a conflict. I always referred to the Society's published cigarettes-in-a-grocery-store teaching (if employed as a checker, you could sell them as incidental to the purpose of the store, which was food, but you could not work in a tobacco store). This always ended the discussion.
Over time, the WTS appointed some new GB members. One was a former CO we knew, who had stayed in our home and shared meals with us. I felt I knew him and so I wrote him a letter. Because he was now in a position to effect change, I wanted to share some talk I was hearing among the dubs in the trenches. I assured him I was not being critical, just wanted him to be aware of what was going on with the rank and file. I ended the letter with a handful of suggestions for procedural changes that, I thought, would boost morale and help maintain a sense of urgency about the future - which had widely disappeared because the new "generation" teaching was viewed by many JWs as pushing the end off into the distant future.
Given the atmosphere of the times, I was reluctant to mail this letter. I left it in my computer and edited it several times , changing the tone wherever it appeared I was being critical. But something told me to wait so I put off mailing it.
During this time, I was assigned a part on the upcoming District Convention. At about the same time, an elder from another congo called me to complain about an article about an upcoming election for a school bond and which I quoted two people, pro and con, and published their opinions. I explained I was merely reporting the event, that this was incidental to the overall work that I did, and cited the cigarettes/grocery store defense and said that with that publication the Society had long since dealt with this issue. He argued with me and I asked him to go back and read what the Society had written and to call me back if he still didn't see it. I did not hear back from him.
A few weeks later I got a phone call from our Circuit Overseer. He'd just talked to this elder and was himself "very concerned" about what he heard. I yada-yada'd him on the grocery store defense, but he said this was different, that I was promoting politics. I told him I could send him several back issues of the newsletter and put his concerns to rest about the context.
He said as long as this matter was "under investigation" it would be better if I didn't present the part on the convention program, that he would assign it to someone else. I asked if he disagreed with the Society's teaching on this, which I felt was clearly applicable in my case. He said it "needs to be investigated."
Two weeks later I received a call from my PO. He wanted to read me a letter he had just written to the CO, at the his request. I was a nice letter stating that the PO had spoken to the rest of the body and that no one had any qualms or concerns about my secular work and that I was an "exemplary" elder and publisher. The PO said he'd been asked to provide this info by the CO and he wanted to share the body's feelings with me privately.
I continued as an elder and was never given any explanation about what the "investigation" revealed. But as long as that CO was there I never got another circuit or district program assignment, until I moved to another circuit. And, of course, I never sent the letter I had written to my "pal" on the GB. I now knew exactly how it would be received.
