Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

6703RE: [eckankartruth] Re: Censureship at Eckankar Survivors Anonymous?

Expand Messages
  • Paul Olson
    Jul 2, 2007

       

      Now Now Kids…Play Nice!

       

      This stuff is why I so seldom post anything.  But it’s a shame that someone as articulate and focused as Leaf should be edited!

       

      Sword

      -------------------

      From: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com [mailto: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of tomleafeater
      Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 4:18 PM
      To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Censureship at Eckankar Survivors Anonymous?

       

      [Cross-posted from ESA
      http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/EckankarSu rvivorsAnonymous /]

      I will try once more to reply on ESA [see url above], and I post with
      the understanding and expectation that my post will not be edited,
      abbreviated, taken out of context, or changed in any way. If this
      can't be honored, then please do not reply to me on this forum. Don't
      write about my posts with your own comments unless you allow readers
      to see the post entirely verbatim.

      Readers here are directed to read my posts/replies at
      either "EckankarTruth" or "X-Eckankar, The Chains of Eck" forums to
      get an accurate read of my posts. I feel the cross-posting is
      necessary to insure integrity.

      http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/eckankartr uth/

      http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/X-Eckankar _The-Chains- of-Eck/

      Also, I privately told Prometheus in response to his private emails
      to me that all promises of confidentiality I made regarding his
      private emails would be rescinded if there were ANY further
      distortions or misrepresentations of ANYthing I have written.

      His and Liz's reference to those private emails and their
      characterization of them does, once again, come close to breaching
      confidences. If this continues, I will post the private emails
      verbatim, in order to let readers judge for themselves the content of
      those emails.

      Also, I am unlikely to respond to any future private emails from Liz
      or Prometheus, since there is a distinct possibility that my emails
      will be further characterized in a bad light.

      First, I'd like to respond to this statement by Liz:

      Liz wrote (see her complete post below for context):

      > And for the record, I didn't edit a post or the wording which was
      > sent (but not approved) though I did use portions to answer Leaf's
      > questions. The rest was left out due to the nature of the nasty
      ness
      > He can claim what ever he wishes, here or on ET. I have nothing
      > further to debate with him. BTW, I haven't posted on ET in a very
      > long time!

      Leaf Replies:

      A post of mine, which was not allowed on the ESA forum, was responded
      to in a post by Liz, who has private access to pending posts by
      persons who have been placed on "moderated" status. The post was
      chopped up into fragments, sometimes without complete sentences, and
      replied to in her own post. The context of my post was changed, and
      thus what I communicated was distorted in the process. I can't make
      heads or tails out of some of my own words in her reply. I find this
      treatment to be highly unethical.

      In my view, there was nothing in the post that I wrote that was NOT
      entirely warranted. It was not "nasty."

      It is a violation of trust for Liz to make ongoing comments about the
      post, such as claim there was "nastiness" in the post, without
      posting it exactly as I'd written it, whole and unedited. As I see
      it, the "nastiness" assertion is being used to justify unnecessary
      censureship of comments not to their liking.

      It is also very disturbing to me that both Liz and Prometheus have
      the practice of continually alleging "lewd" or "nasty posts," while
      leaving no manner for the readers to see those posts and determine
      for themselves whether they deserve such epithets. The samples
      revealed to me by Prometheus in private emails do not warrant the
      hyperbole and exagerations made by Prometheus and Liz.

      Thus, as to Prometheus' and Liz's allegations about Zoey using
      pseudonyms and sending in "nasty" private emails, I can only wonder
      if there is any substance behind these allegations, since now even my
      own censured post is being described in exactly such a manner, and
      there have been hints that even I am using other pseudonyms
      besides "leafeater," which is absolutely not true.

      Another comment I'd like to address is this remark by Prometheus:

      Prometheus wrote (see below for complete context):

      "Leaf then came to Marla's defense while being unaware of Zoey's
      neg. involvement. Zoey (he/she) got very nasty on the site and
      privately. There was also confusion with what was said to whom. I was
      unable to discuss this with Leaf privately because he had already
      formed an opinion. I put Leaf on temporary moderated status because I
      didn't want to keep the discussion escalating. Unfortunately Liz (Co-
      moderator)read a pending message and replied to it in part. This
      created even more disharmony which became impossible to resolve."

      Leaf replies:

      My posts to Marla, as well as other related posts I've made
      concerning Marla, were not in any way prompted by anything concerning
      Zoey. Liz and Prometheus are conflating the issues they have with
      Marla on one hand, and Zoey on the other, which are two separate
      issues. My comments regarding Marla are regarding only Marla, and
      don't relate to Zoey. So the implication that I lacked information
      concerning Zoey which somehow led me to make incorrect statements
      concerning Marla makes no sense and defies rational thinking.

      Leafeater

      --- In EckankarSurvivorsAn onymous@yahoogro ups.com, " Elizabeth "
      <ewickings@. ..> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Marla,
      >
      > Please read message #2687 which I posted below, It was a reply to
      > you, along with questions I had for you. Maybe you missed this
      > particular message? At any rate, the questions were posted to get
      an
      > idea of your history from this ex HI bf.
      >
      > One thing I would really like to know is how the Eck members would
      > react if you had gone to an eckankar yahoo group such as Hu-Chat
      and
      > asked them the same questions? And if you do ask them (current
      > eckists) please share your experience. Anyway, it was my attempt
      at
      > having a conversation to clear the air, give you the chance to
      share
      > your story in more depth. My chance to ask questions that might
      allow
      > you the chance again to share your experience, and for me to
      listen.
      >
      > You will see I also responded to Zoey in this same post. As
      > Prometheus shared, he/she was sending private nasty messages to the
      > group, and privately. Neither Prometheus, nor I initiated any of
      > these private conversations with him/her, nor did we actually
      provoke
      > some of the posts that was sent to ESA and moderated, at least to
      my
      > knowlege. I went back and looked over my initial comments to
      his/her
      > 9Zoey's) questions, and apparently they were not read by him/her?
      > This individual got nasty first, on the skirts of posts made by you.
      >
      > Doing further research and comparing posts, IDs, and when an
      > individual signed up and joined / left the group, what type of
      > program was being used to mask the origination of posts privately
      and
      > to the group, (which were moderated) yes three differing IDs and
      > posters (which two of them being one person) did get addressed in
      one
      > post.
      >
      > I do appologise for including my comments to Zoey, or even Leaf in
      > the same post as the one to you. Not a good excuse I guess, but I
      am
      > rather busy and was attempting to make my life easier by only
      > presenting one message. I won't do that again.
      >
      > I do not feel the need to explain myself to Leaf, which is exactly
      > what I intended for him to understand. It was suggested to him by
      > Prometheus to contact us (me) privately, yet Leaf did not, and it
      > appears he also did not take what Prometheus shared with him
      > (privately) as enough proof to warrent how Zoey was handled.
      >
      > I also was an admirer of Leaf's excellent sage posts, but when an
      > individual DEMANDS anything of me, when it does not concern them,
      > they will come up against a brick wall.
      >
      > And for the record, I didn't edit a post or the wording which was
      > sent (but not approved) though I did use portions to answer Leaf's
      > questions. The rest was left out due to the nature of the nasty
      ness
      > He can claim what ever he wishes, here or on ET. I have nothing
      > further to debate with him. BTW, I haven't posted on ET in a very
      > long time!
      >
      > Anyway, below is a copy of the questions I had concerning your post
      > about integrity. A portion of the post was directed to others
      > besides yourself, of which I explained the reasoning in this post,
      as
      > well in posts in answer to Leaf, Zoey and Rowan_Oak22. If Leaf
      > wishes to continue dialog with any of these individuals privately,
      > that is his business. But I do not feel the need to prove, provide
      or
      > justify myself to him!
      >
      > Again, please understand I am curious and the questions were with
      > good intent.
      >
      > Liz
      >
      > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~
      > Message #2687
      >
      > Sharon ;-)
      Re: integrity
      >
      > Hi Non ekster,
      > It seems weird to me as well! It started with Marlasobbing
      > coming over here from ET. She, apparently, wanted to share
      > (with more people) her frustrations, anger, and some negative
      > information about her ex-6th Initiate boyfriend and that he
      > wasn't very "spiritual" since he carried a condom next to his
      > Eck I.D. card, and that he cheated on her with hookers! Of
      > course, I don't know how she really knew about the condom,
      > the cheating, or the hookers, but it was a juicy story about a
      > male H.I. misbehaving (which is really nothing new for either
      > gender for Eckists in general). She, also, mentioned how he
      > had taken her for an E.S.A. session and that she liked this
      > female H.I. and, basically, said that the E.S.A. was very
      > convincing with her silver tongue and friendly demeanor.
      >
      > I don't see that the term Victim Consciousness is always a
      > New Age term, especially, when it's applied to the wrong
      > "relationship" choices that we make. Sometimes the rejected
      > person will place all blame on the other person while not taking
      > responsibility for making a bad choice, seeing the signs, and
      > admitting they screwed up. Closing one's eyes to the truth and
      > then blaming the other person or someone else, to me, is a form
      > of Victim Consciousness. It's kind of like how some women will
      > choose "bad boys" and then not take responsibility for it or
      fail
      > to (and refuse to) look into the "why" and then taking the steps
      > to correct their destructive decision making processes. Life
      becomes
      > one long drama or soap opera for some people. Maybe they enjoy
      > the attention too! I'm not saying this was what Marla was doing,
      > but it seemed like it was possible and after awhile. It wasn't like
      > it was a super long relationship (one year) IMO. Plus, she still
      saw
      > it in a "romantic" way! That's why I agreed with Liz and said
      that
      > it was seeming like this was a one-sided version (of the truth)
      > from a woman scorned. I know that I should not have "talked
      about"
      > Marla nor made this observation or assumption, but then again it
      > reminded me of situations in the past where I saw others caught in
      > similar circumstances and one heard only one side of the
      relationship
      > story.
      >
      > Leaf then came to Marla's defense while being unaware of Zoey's
      > neg. involvment. Zoey (he/she) got very nasty on the site and
      privately.
      > There was also confusion with what was said to whom. I was unable
      > to discuss this with Leaf privately because he had already formed
      an
      > opinion. I put Leaf on temporary moderated status because I didn't
      > want to keep the discussion escalating. Unfortunately Liz (Co-
      moderator)
      > read a pending message and replied to it in part. This created even
      > more disharmony which became impossible to resolve.
      >
      > Anyway, it was an interesting learning experience. I admit that
      > there were mistakes made (people aren't perfect) and that it could
      > have been done better and kinder and there could have been more
      > tolerance and consideration given to one another. So for that, on
      my
      > part, I apologize to Marla and to everyone.
      >
      > Prometheus
      > p.s. I do appreciate Liz being a Co-moderator and taking care of
      > the sites while I am away. Thanks Liz!
      >

    • Show all 14 messages in this topic