Tigger) wrote:
>For Newbies:

>This is another of Diane Richardson's dirty tactics.......Mocking up new
>threads to spread lies and disinformation to attack people who do not
>agree with her or who refuse to bow down anb kiss her ass.     A Barbara
>Schwarz wanna be?    

>Do a Diane Richardson google search and you will see this has been her
>main.... most often....only "service" to a.r.s. for several years.

>Tigger

> Diane Richardson is a key poster in ARS. In 1995, when she started to post, she was venerated by critics for the quality of her posts - brilliantly argued and researched. Today, in 2001, Diane still posts and the quality of her posts are still outstanding. However, because she changed the *focus* of her criticism, from the CoS to critics, she is now virulently attacked by critics who claim she "changed". Fact is, she didn't change at all. Critics simply make their judgment by whether one is on their side or not. This is what bigotry is all about.

> 1. If there's any possibility that a question or gripe is voiced by an outsider who legitimately wants a response, respond politely and address the specific question or gripe.
> 2. If it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the questioner is an OSA operative who kills pets for fun and is trying to cause trouble with their posting, respond politely and address the specifics of the question or gripe. Optionally, add a factual statement of the evidence against them and a link to more details.
> 3. When ranting, do not crosspost.
> 4. Speak to others as if you have already been identified as a member of a group of looney tune flamers who make spurious accusations and take steps to ensure that your credibility depends on objective and verifiable sources rather than your say so. (This is good advice even if one is not viewed as having suspect credibility because over reliance on one's word rather than objective and verifiable sources is a bad habit and weakens one's argument.)
> 5. Don't accuse anyone of working for OSA unless you have evidence from off the net. Scientologists[tm] in good standing are the people most in need of information from ars and are also the most likely to appear as if OSA operatives designated to cause trouble.
> 6. If you can't *prove* an accusation is true, don't make one.

> Scientology[tm] was gifted with a genuine BigWin[tm] when the crew on ars stopped being known as rational, responsible advocates for freedom of speech and became known as rabid hairtrigger flamers collectively referred to as "anti's.