What's with Diane Richardson?
No User
I hadn't read ars for a couple of years, and now I find that she does nothing but attack Bob Minton and the LMT. Why?
Does she have a job? A family? Friends? A pet? Anything besides ars? It just seems that she is so full of anger and bitterness. At what? I understand it when it's a former cult member, but to my knowledge, she never was. So why is she so bitter and vindictive?
Diane, you're welcome to answer these questions yourself, but I honestly expect nothing more than a very shrill attack on me.
---
This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
It was posted with the use of anonymizing software at
http://anon.xg.nu
---
Roland
>
> Can someone explain what has happened to her. Years ago, she was an effective and articulate critic of CoS.
>
> I hadn't read ars for a couple of years, and now I find that she does nothing but attack Bob Minton and the LMT. Why?
>
> Does she have a job? A family? Friends? A pet? Anything besides ars? It just seems that she is so full of anger and bitterness. At what? I understand it when it's a former cult member, but to my knowledge, she never was. So why is she so bitter and vindictive?
>
> Diane, you're welcome to answer these questions yourself, but I honestly expect nothing more than a very shrill attack on me.
She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong with
her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
break from her medication which she should not do.
Take your lithium, Diane. :o(
Roland
--
"I notice that we all believe that Venus has a methane atmosphere and
is unlivable. I almost got run down by a freight locomotive the other
day -- didn't look very uncivilized to me." - L. Ron Hubbard,
"Between Lives Implants" lecture, SHSBC #317. 23 July 1963.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~xemu/rams/Venusloc.ram
lame...@cotse.com
>Can someone explain what has happened to her. Years ago,
> she was an effective and articulate critic of CoS.
Minton couldn't buy her like he did with Jacobsen. And BTW are you implying
she's no longer articulate?
>I hadn't read ars for a couple of years, and now I find that
> she does nothing but attack Bob Minton and the LMT. Why?
<Mittens> Diane but i keep you ass my ass licker too
<Mittens> innie/vagina/cunt/field of Venus is an occassionally useful
description of the four horsewomen
<Mittens> if my ear were a cunt I could fuck it!
<Mittens> Whose cock was so long he could suck it
<Mittens> fuck off Diane she won't speak to a cunt like you
<Mittens> Darnitrol you stupid cocksucker Don't cum back
<Mittens> Diane lick the dog shit off of my boots
<Mittens> Diane you suck the cock of your principles
<Mittens> bivalve and Diane suck the cock of each others principles
No User
> Minton couldn't buy her like he did with Jacobsen. And BTW are you implying
> she's no longer articulate?
Not implying, I'm saying it outright. She's in pure meltdown.
Did the crap that Minton said to her on IRC cause this? He spewed a bunch of profanities and it was like throwing water on the wicked witch of the west?
All that's left is for her to start babbling complete nonsense and turn into a pile of clothes.
I hate watching it, but can't help it. I slow down at accidents, too. Human nature, I'm afraid. Somebody who cares about her needs to get her some help. Is there anyone who cares???
Dave Bird
be...@virgin.net> writes:
>No User wrote:
>>
>> Can someone explain what has happened to her. Years ago, she was an effective
>and articulate critic of CoS.
>>
>> I hadn't read ars for a couple of years, and now I find that she does nothing
>but attack Bob Minton and the LMT. Why?
>>
>> Does she have a job? A family? Friends? A pet? Anything besides ars? It just
>seems that she is so full of anger and bitterness. At what? I understand it when
>it's a former cult member, but to my knowledge, she never was. So why is she so
>bitter and vindictive?
>>
>> Diane, you're welcome to answer these questions yourself, but I honestly
>expect nothing more than a very shrill attack on me.
>
>She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong with
>her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
>break from her medication which she should not do.
>Take your lithium, Diane. :o(
You have to take into account she also is, and always was,
borderline paranoid just like Hubbard. This is why she gets
into insane positions where she "must" be right no what the cost.
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
www.xemu.demon.co.uk 2B0D 5195 337B A3E6 DDAC BD38 7F2F FD8E 7391 F44F
Starshadow
"Dave Bird" <da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:RQCWBFFR...@xemu.demon.co.uk...
And for the record, being bipolar has nothing to do with her "need to be
right". I'm bipolar. And btw, lithium doesn't work for all bipolar peoples.
Personally, I characterise her as a little yappy dog, the kind that barks
and grabs ankles and hangs on, in her pursuit of always being "right". She
hates being contradicted. She and I went round about on the ECT issue (I'm
agin' it) early on when I still respected her opinions, but not enough to
abandon mine, which was researched and well thought out as far as I was
concerned. Eventually she characterised me as closed minded because I
wouldn't read the specific books she wanted me to read (I'd read plenty on
the subject and had a full plate otherwise at the time) and that was that.
It was, to me, the first glimmerings of her "need to be right". She seems
to really latch onto anyone who defies her.
Pity, because she is quite bright and well read, and I'm a sucker for
intelligence, generally speaking.
--
Bright Blessings,
Starshadow (SP4, KoX) (Yes, I have an @home account now. )
(stars...@starshadow.net still works)
"Feminism--the radical notion that women are people, too"
Blue Xenu
Yeah, just like you, Dave.
"Here's to absent friends--fuck 'em!" --Frank Sinatra
Dave Bird
>>>> Diane, you're welcome to answer these questions yourself, but I
>>>> honestly expect nothing more than a very shrill attack on me.
>>>
>>>She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong with
>> _______depressive_______
>>>her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
>>>break from her medication which she should not do.
>>>Take your lithium, Diane. :o(
>>
>>You have to take into account she also is, and always was,
>>borderline paranoid just like Hubbard. This is why she gets
>>into insane positions where she "must" be right no what the cost.
>
>Yeah, just like you, Dave.
Sucks yahboo to you too, eh? I am devastated by the wit of your argument
And the insane statement that I "must" be right no matter what,
which simple does not accord with observation. When I am shown
wrong I admit it and apologise usually off my own bat without
anyone prompting me (e.g. over the news about Koos).
In article<bSi0BxD4...@xemu.demon.co.uk>, Dave Bird writes:
>Subject: I eat crow :-[
>Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 20:59:52 +0100
>
>
> I refused to believe that this article was about Koos,
> because of what __appeared__ to be inconsistencies.
>
>
> I was wrong.
Dave Bird
>> >She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong with
>> depressive
>> >her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
>> >break from her medication which she should not do.
>> >Take your lithium, Diane. :o(
>>
>> You have to take into account she also is, and always was,
>> borderline paranoid just like Hubbard. This is why she gets
>> into insane positions where she "must" be right no what the cost.
>
> And for the record, being bipolar has nothing to do with her "need to be
>right". I'm bipolar. And btw, lithium doesn't work for all bipolar peoples.
I'm far from expert on the subject. I know that many people simply
have mood swings without being paranoid, and many people are paranoid
without having mood swings, but there is a strong link between the two
and people often combine a manic swing with paranoid behaviour.
>
> Personally, I characterise her as a little yappy dog, the kind that barks
>and grabs ankles and hangs on,
That's the image which occurs to me, too.
William Barwell
No User <no....@anon.xg.nu> wrote:
>Can someone explain what has happened to her. Years ago, she
was an effective and articulate critic of CoS.
>
>I hadn't read ars for a couple of years, and now I
find that she does nothing but attack Bob Minton and the LMT. Why?
Some years ago she stopped attacking Scientology and started to
harass critics, starting with Paulette Cooper.
Why? Dunno. She has since that time spent 98% of her net
time picking fights with the critics.
>Does she have a job? A family? Friends? A pet? Anything
besides ars? It just seems that she is so full of anger
and bitterness. At what? I understand it when it's a former
cult member, but to my knowledge, she never was. So why is
she so bitter and vindictive?
The net attracts kooks. She is one. Every really active group has at
least one. ARS has Diane and Lex.
The Xian newsgroups have Rev. Steve Winter.
The Atheist newsgroup has Boatwright.
And so on.
Pests who thrive on stirring up crap
and causing trouble for no good reason.
Bitter personal anger for no good reason
or particular aim in mind.
Its just one of them things.
Its the adrenaline rush I guess.
>Diane, you're welcome to answer these questions yourself,
but I honestly expect nothing more than a very shrill attack on me.
Pope Charles
SubGenius Pope of Houston
Slack!
Starshadow
> In<17TK5.27985$E85.7...@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com>, Starshadow writes:
>
> >> >She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong
with
> >> depressive
> >> >her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
> >> >break from her medication which she should not do.
> >> >Take your lithium, Diane. :o(
> >>
> >> You have to take into account she also is, and always was,
> >> borderline paranoid just like Hubbard. This is why she gets
> >> into insane positions where she "must" be right no what the cost.
> >
> > And for the record, being bipolar has nothing to do with her "need to
be
> >right". I'm bipolar. And btw, lithium doesn't work for all bipolar
peoples.
>
> I'm far from expert on the subject. I know that many people simply
> have mood swings without being paranoid, and many people are paranoid
> without having mood swings, but there is a strong link between the two
> and people often combine a manic swing with paranoid behaviour.
> >
This is all true. And one can hallucinate under deep depression, too. But
this hasn't anything to do with a certain person's personality, per se, in
my opinion. (as a mental health consumer I know a bit about the disorder, as
it affects me and those close to me who either have it or have to put up
with the vagaries of those of us who have it)
> > Personally, I characterise her as a little yappy dog, the kind that
barks
> >and grabs ankles and hangs on,
>
> That's the image which occurs to me, too.
Thomas Gandow
Dave Bird schrieb:
>
> In<17TK5.27985$E85.7...@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com>, Starshadow writes:
>
> >> >She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong with
> >> depressive
> >> >her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
> >> >break from her medication which she should not do.
> >> >Take your lithium, Diane. :o(
> >>
> >> You have to take into account she also is, and always was,
> >> borderline paranoid just like Hubbard. This is why she gets
> >> into insane positions where she "must" be right no what the cost.
> >
> > And for the record, being bipolar has nothing to do with her "need to be
> >right". I'm bipolar. And btw, lithium doesn't work for all bipolar peoples.
>
> I'm far from expert on the subject. I know that many people simply
> have mood swings without being paranoid, and many people are paranoid
> without having mood swings, but there is a strong link between the two
> and people often combine a manic swing with paranoid behaviour.
> >
> > Personally, I characterise her as a little yappy dog, the kind that barks
> >and grabs ankles and hangs on,
>
> That's the image which occurs to me, too.
It is a nice and friendly picture, to some extend analytical.
But Be carefull. Do not "dehumanize" her, as she will call it.
TG
Keith
>Diane, you're welcome to answer these questions yourself, but I honestly expect nothing more than a very shrill attack on me.
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Keith (Use Reply-to for email)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where do you discover free software for Windows? Strongsignals DOT COM is a
great place to start: http://Strongsignals.com "Where would Christianity be
if Jesus got eight to fifteen years with time off for good behavior?" NY
State Senator James Donovan, speaking in support of capital punishment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith
<39FB3F...@virgin.net> wrote:
>She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong with
>her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
>break from her medication which she should not do.
And people complain if a Scientologist does this sort of thing.
Any person that criticizes the critics is either wrong, mentally deranged or
a troll.
Face it people you are nothing but hypocrites.
--
Best Regards,
Keith (Use Reply-to for email)
----------------------------------------------------------
When the Germans hunted down the Jews it didn't bother me
for I was not a Jew. When the Germans exterminated the Jews
it did not bother me for I was not a Jew. While the Germans
go after the Scientologist it does not bother me for I am
not a Scientologist.......
------------------------------------------------------------
Dobe R Mann
>On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 22:05:41 +0100, Roland
> <39FB3F...@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong with
>>her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
>>break from her medication which she should not do.
>
>And people complain if a Scientologist does this sort of thing.
>Any person that criticizes the critics is either wrong, mentally deranged or
>a troll.
>Face it people you are nothing but hypocrites.
Face it, you're a Troll. You wrote this on IRC:
[21:55] <KeithYit> I have had the longest running troll on ARS. The
truth is I don't give a shit about Scientolgy, but is fun to see the
critics go looney tune when I post something.
[21:56] <KeithYit> I don't believe anything I write. This is pure
entertainment to me.
Anything else to say, chump?
Dobe R Mann
SP4 Tone 1.95
Read www.xenu.net
See www.xenutv.com
_____________________________________________
INCIDENT 4
LOUD SNAP (Bones breaking)
CHEVROLETS COME OUT
BURN RUBBER
FISHTAIL RIGHT
DO U-TURN
STALL
FLAT TIRE (No motion)
BLOWS HORN
BLOWS MISCAVIGE
CRASH
Dobe R Mann
>On 29 Oct 2000 15:42:23 -0600, wbar...@starbase.neosoft.com (William Barwell)
>wrote:
>
>>The net attracts kooks.
>
>Like a "Pope" who fancies the Vatican to be in Houston.
Can you prove that the "Vatican" of Pope Charles church *isn't* in
Houston?
>
>>Pests who thrive on stirring up crap
>>and causing trouble for no good reason.
>>Bitter personal anger for no good reason
>>or particular aim in mind.
>
>
>
> The Art of Usnet Debate
>
> A How to Guide by:
>
>William Barwell- master-debator
>
>==================================
>
>From the forward:
>
>>And debate facts or leave.
>
>>There is only one way. First you have to get a 2 X 4 to get there
>>attention, like the old joke goes. Smack! Right between the eyes.
>
>From Chapter I: Selecting the Topic-
>
>>Every off topic psych bash post will be sent to your ISP and action
>>demanded. If it takes throwing you off Jovanet to stop your
>>irresponsible and unacceptable bullshit, so be it.
>>If you want war, bitch, you are about to get it.
>
>From Chapter VI: What if Your Opponent is Female?-
>
>>Diane can go fuck herself.
>>Her shit does not really put PC in a bad light as much as Diane
>>wishes. It just drags up old crap from the past to be hurtful.
>>Who cares what Diane thinks. Or her sycophants. Or you, Tarla.
>
>Or
>
>>Now dat ho' don't wancha to know de truth, but here it am.
>>Kinda makes ya wanna know, what de fuck do dem fools
>>think they doin'?
>
>From Chapter IX: Debating Theology-
>
>>DUHHHHHHH! Clueless clams!
>
>>We know you asshole dril and train in this sort of shit.
>>That is why you are known as a nasty cult, not a real
>>religion.
>
>>Christianity's ugly religous terrorism....
>
>
>From Chapter X: Regaining the Lost Advantage, Intimidation-
>
>>You clowns know where *I* live. Why don't you come the
>>fuck over here and do something fucking about it?
>
>>To those who pretend to have a bad case of the vapors
>>at the very mention of the word fuck, fuck off.
>
>From Chapter XIII: What is Debate on ARS?
>
>>Somebody add more water to the slime pit, time for your
>>triple gainer into this slime-puddle, deary. Hop in and wallow
>>with me! I can keep it up as long as you can.
>
>
>Message-ID: <62e3dg$cnc$1...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <4j497t$c...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <565s3q$2...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <53hte9$a...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <5vhlfg$1gv$1...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <4lt3i5$2...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <4fjdcd$j...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <4hlhrb$7...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <534nr2$6...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
>Message-Id: <5uv3eg$naa$1...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>
Dave Bird
<starsh...@home.com> writes:
>> I'm far from expert on the subject. I know that many people simply
>> have mood swings without being paranoid, and many people are paranoid
>> without having mood swings, but there is a strong link between the two
>> and people often combine a manic swing with paranoid behaviour.
>> >
>
> This is all true. And one can hallucinate under deep depression, too. But
>this hasn't anything to do with a certain person's personality, per se, in
>my opinion. (as a mental health consumer I know a bit about the disorder, as
>it affects me and those close to me who either have it or have to put up
>with the vagaries of those of us who have it)
I think it is: I think Diane is inherently displaying the early
trends of paranoid and megalomaniac behaviour i.e. extreme suspicious-
ness, the need to always be right and shift blame onto others.
Generally this is coped with and not much worse than I
have seen in many people who have not progressed to paranoid delusions
or other mental health problems. But it is worse when she is manic.
>
>> > Personally, I characterise her as a little yappy dog, the kind that
>barks
>> >and grabs ankles and hangs on,
>>
>> That's the image which occurs to me, too.
_____ | | / /
/ \ \ /
-- -| Duck! | \__ ____ /
\_____/ / \ / \ | Da...@xemu.demon.co.uk
/| / You \ / | \ \
/ |_\called?/__/ / | |_____________/////////
< |____\_______| | |(______________ ()
\ | \ / () | () | | \\\\\\\\\
\| | __|__ | |
_|___/___ \___ | | TWOING !!!
__---- ----__\---\_
/ __ | ______________________
\____-------------______/ \ / \
/ / / / _/ ---| hmm, it theemth |
/ \ / / / | i thlighly |
/ $ / / | mithtook |
/ / / | your meaning there, |
| | / | buthtah !!! |
\______________// \______________________/
\________/
Dave Bird
Keith <kew...@apexmail.com> writes:
>On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 22:05:41 +0100, Roland
> <39FB3F...@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>She is a "manic-depressant". She is BIPOLAR. That is what is wrong with
>>her. And she goes even more nuts from time to time because she takes a
>>break from her medication which she should not do.
>
>And people complain if a Scientologist does this sort of thing.
>Any person that criticizes the critics is either wrong,
People who say that two plus two equals five are actually,
objectively wrong. So are people who say that locking up
a woman until she dies of thirst is OK behaviour.
--
' ' ' .:::. ' :: ' ' 'what do Scientologists say when ' http://www.
' (o\ /o) .::. ' you ask why their money-grubbing ' xemu.demon.
' \ " / XEMU ' killed a woman by starvation? ' co.uk '
' '-' :::: ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
' :v: \'''| ' BIGOT BIGOT BIGOT '
' ;;\:::/;;\/ / ' OO / / \ ? '
' ;;;;;;;;;BEER ' (~~) .00 @@-._ \ '
' WithAKick\/ ' ( ) ( =) (O ) ( ") (" )
' 'LikeAnHBomb ' ' ' ' ^^^^ ' ' ^^ ^^ ' ' ' ' ^^ ^^ ' ' "" ' ""
penz...@my-deja.com
<2EBDC21D431BD346.AB01D10C...@lp.airnews.net>,
wbar...@starbase.neosoft.com (William Barwell) wrote:
> >Can someone explain what has happened to her. Years ago, she
> was an effective and articulate critic of CoS.
> >I hadn't read ars for a couple of years, and now I
> find that she does nothing but attack Bob Minton and the LMT. Why?
> Some years ago she stopped attacking Scientology and started to
> harass critics, starting with Paulette Cooper.
> Why? Dunno. She has since that time spent 98% of her net
> time picking fights with the critics.
>
> >Does she have a job? A family? Friends? A pet? Anything
> besides ars? It just seems that she is so full of anger
> and bitterness. At what? I understand it when it's a former
> cult member, but to my knowledge, she never was. So why is
> she so bitter and vindictive?
>
> The net attracts kooks. She is one. Every really active group has at
> least one. ARS has Diane and Lex.
> and causing trouble for no good reason.
> Bitter personal anger for no good reason
> or particular aim in mind.
>
> Its just one of them things.
> Its the adrenaline rush I guess.
>
> >Diane, you're welcome to answer these questions yourself,
> but I honestly expect nothing more than a very shrill attack on me.
>
> Pope Charles
> SubGenius Pope of Houston
> Slack!
buuh, let me try once again, thou it seems a waste of time.
I've been reading this ars for sometime now and i also know most of the
people who post in here from Irc too. I don't think many in here are
critics at all. Just nuts. Funny how those who seems to be "nuttiest"
are the once who yells loudist that they are critics.
Dump the critic part of all the posts you see in here ars. Think about
people you meet everyday, friends, go-workers at office, people you
meet with your hobbies etc., and compare them to these people posting
in here claiming they are "effective critics". Is there any similarity?
I didn't find any. These people in here are simply nuts.
Do you really think that people who have been years a devoted
Scientologist, can turn a critics at once just by yelling so? I'm
magoo, i'm free! I'm critic!
Good grief, i say!
What about these obvious fools and totally revolting persons who posts
articles with using C word in attempt to insult ref? I counted 27 posts
like that. Would you stand such a behaviour from your friends, go-
workers, hell anyone you meet in RL? How would you respond in RL? Why
not respond same way in here? Why you (you the normal reader) allow
this to happen? Why not post against it?
I don't belive these bullygangs stop anything if you just stay quiet.
They just go on and on, creating a collective lie to justify their
actions.
I'm not a kook just because you and your pals claim so, but you and
your pals ar bullies when doing so. It shows your character, not mine.
Perhaps this once was a good forum for critics, but me or ref are not
the ones who spoil this. You better look at yourself.
--
The Church of Scientology is both an interesting
and important new religious movement. It is
interesting because its operating values are in
the area of logical, rationalist thought. -- Christine Norstrand aka
Saint Xine
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
mimus
You came close to reality here, but were aimed in the wrong direction.
>I'm not a kook just because you and your pals claim so, but you and
>your pals ar bullies when doing so. It shows your character, not mine.
>
>Perhaps this once was a good forum for critics, but me or ref are not
>the ones who spoil this. You better look at yourself.
I saw
many people
reduced to
incoherent babbling,
stripping off clothes,
crawling around on the ground,
banging heads, limbs and other body parts
against furniture and walls,
barking,
losing all sense of one's identity
and intense and persistent suicidal ideation.
--Declaration of Andre Tabayoyon
I'm an OT.--Lisa McPherson
If you imagine 40-50 Scientologists
posting on the Internet every few days,
we'll just run the SP's right off the system.
It will be quite simple, actually.
--Elaine Siegel, OSA INT (1996)
Case 5/BTLA/SP1/BAD
Terra Xenu
Jim Glidewell
> Can someone explain what has happened to her. Years ago, she was
> an effective and articulate critic of CoS.
I've lurked in a.r.s for a *long* time. At one time, I really admired
Diane more than any other poster here. Her "just the facts" attitude
and her willingness to do actual research made her an anchor in the group.
Her writings were clear, well written, and authoritative. She was one
of my A.R.S heroes...
One still very occasionally sees a posting by Diane which indicates the
she still has the ability to write a truly informative and invective-
free posting, but such occurances are rare.
I refuse to speculate on her mental health or personal life, but there is
one net-visible aspect of her life which I believe has done much to
poison her relationships here...
IRC.
For some reason, IRC seems to bring out the absolute *worst* in people.
Perhaps it is the temptation to grandstand and wound (as on Usenet),
without the luxury of time to reflect on whether to really hit the
"Send" button.
I've never tried any of the scientology related IRC channels, nor do
I wish to. I assume that at times they are amusing and informative,
otherwise there wouldn't be so many folks attracted to them. But I've
also see stuff quoted from them which makes me *very* glad to stay
away. Fairly nasty stuff from people whom I respect. And I also
know that most of the feuds in A.R.S seem to have their roots in
IRC.
I really think that IRC is simply _bad_ for a lot of people, Diane
(and Bob) included. It encourages petty squabbling and vicious
backstabbing, and fosters ill feelings which lead to more of
the same. I know that my skin isn't thick enough to let the
insults roll off of me.
I understand the allure of online communications, particularly those
with the immediacy of IRC and other online chat. But there are times
when the costs are higher than any possible benefit.
I encourage _everyone_ who participates in IRC to reflect briefly
on the number of "enemies" they've made there, and whether the
nature of the medium, or the people it tends to attract, are the
reasons for these enemies.
I really miss the "old" Diane. A.R.S could still use her.
I could be completely off base here, but I really think that IRC
is very bad for her.
Please, Diane, consider dropping off of IRC for a month or so.
Your "friends" there will carry on without you. And your
"enemies" will quickly tire of talking about those not
present. Just walk away. It isn't worth it.
I really, sincerely believe that you would be a better person
for doing so.
--
Jim Glidewell
My opinions only
penz...@my-deja.com
jimgli...@home.com (Jim Glidewell) wrote:
Good post you send!
I think ref usually sends good posts. Only this monkey growd who never
have made any good posts jumps right up and starts picking at her. They
can do it because people like you stay quiet. I'm glad that you posted
this anyway.
What it comes to IRC and your theory that it poisons her, i think you
are perhaps partly right. Irc can be very stressfull place, addictive
even. I would however say, that there are much more people on Irc who
attack against ref than whom she has "attacked". Continuos personal
attacks can poison anyone. It's called harrashment, i belive. Many of
her so called "victims" really deserved the critisism she gave to them.
I know that there are some people who couldn't handle it, for example
one "southern lady". :)
Point is not in that, that ref has changed. It's not, some people just
try to make everyone belive so. I've seen the true nature of these who
calls themself an "effective critics" and it's not very admireable.
They have probably chased more critics away from Irc/ARS than ref ever.
They do it deliberatly, but Ref's "victims" always were just ones who
she critisized by their actions or words. Never personality's.
I don't want to jump against critics of Scn, but i'm not going to let
people alter the history of what happened. It would be wrong and
immoral.
I also don't belive that a bully gang would stop just because if she
leaves Irc. I know they wont. They can't, it's in their blood. They
only stop when there will be enough people to yell them to shutup and
make clear that such a behaviour is not tolerated.
...only it needs you good people to pick up your kbd and start typing.
--
...there was at least 27 posts calling ref with C word. Shame on you
people who didn't critisize those who posted them.
Gerry Armstrong
>On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 13:59:20 -0500, No User <no....@anon.xg.nu> wrote:
>
>>Can someone explain what has happened to her. Years ago,
>> she was an effective and articulate critic of CoS.
>
>Minton couldn't buy her like he did with Jacobsen. And BTW are you implying
>she's no longer articulate?
>
You've got it all wrong clammykins. Bob Minton wouldn't buy her, and
she apparently hates him because of it.
Look, here are the facts. Many people like Bob. Some of those who like
him he gave money to. Some he didn't.
Some people, like Diane, hate Bob. He gave money to none of those
people.
Therefore, although there is, contrary to Diane's assertion, no
relationship between Bob giving people money and their liking him,
there is a clear relationship between Bob not giving some people money
and them hating him.
Bob, it can be said truthfully, has been very wise in not giving money
to Diane and people like her who are haters.
(c) Gerry Armstrong
JimDBB
>From: jimgli...@home.com (Jim Glidewell)
>Date: 10/30/00 12:55 PM Central
You are right on the money, Mr. Glidewell. thank you for a most articulate
post.
JimDBB
lcs Mixmaster Remailer
>What about these obvious fools and totally revolting persons who posts
>articles with using C word in attempt to insult ref? I counted 27 posts
>like that. Would you stand such a behaviour from your friends, go-
>workers, hell anyone you meet in RL? How would you respond in RL? Why
>not respond same way in here? Why you (you the normal reader) allow
>this to happen? Why not post against it?
How would you respond to someone who talked like this "IRL?"
dianer: Dear, dear, Deirdre. You have a lot to learn
about Keith's testicles.
dianer: In fact, I'd be willing to bet that there's an
awful lot you don't know about anyone's testicles.
dianer: Including those of your dead (what was he --
third? fourth?) husband.
dianer: Should I include that husband of yours who had
the sex change operation as an "ex", Deirdre, or should I count him as a
girlfriend?
dianer: Looks to me as though you've collected yourself
just about as many ex-husbands as you collected ex-
religions.
..
dianer: When did you have you sex change operation,
Xmudder?
Xmudder: altho, technically it was just a hand fasting
dianer: Was it *before* or *after* you tried fucking the
pig?
Xmudder: Stanford, of course. I don't live near Johns
Hopkins.
Xmudder: dianer: after.
Xmudder: assumeing you are refering to my ex, the pig.
dianer: Johns Hopkins stopped doing those more than 20
years ago, Xmudder.
dianer: You're not even good at lying.
dianer: No, I'm not referring to your ex, the pig. Did
you marry both Deirdre *and* a pig? At the same time?
dianer: Or was it Deirdre who was fucking the pig?
Nomen Nescio
>Can someone explain what has happened to her. Years ago, she was an effective
>and articulate critic of CoS.
>I hadn't read ars for a couple of years, and now I find that she does nothing
>but attack Bob Minton and the LMT. Why?
>
>Does she have a job?
yes, research librarian still (AFAIK).
>A family?
a partner still (AFAIK), though no children luckily for them.
>Friends?
not many.
>A pet?
a white persian cat to stroke while posting, but she strangled it.
>Anything besides ars? It just
>seems that she is so full of anger and bitterness. At what? I understand it
when
>it's a former cult member, but to my knowledge, she never was. So why is she so
>bitter and vindictive?
she's nuts.
ptsc
wrote:
>On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:45:06 GMT, penz...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>...there was at least 27 posts calling ref with C word. Shame on you
>>people who didn't critisize those who posted them.
>
>My gawd, you've taken me out of your sig file.
>Here are a few suggestions:
>1. Lex is a tired c and hangs out at the VD clinic.
>2. Lex is not a deaf c but pretends she is.
>3. Lex is a scientology shill c and Erin pulls her strings.
>4. Lex isn't particularly fastidious about personal hygiene so
>everyone knows she is a c.
>Let me know if you need more.
5. Lex has her head stuck in her c.
6. Lex calls 'em like she c's em.
7. O say can you c.
8. Lex needs a good dip in the c.
9. Lex has just founded the c org.
ptsc
Saint Xine
Oh my. This gives a whole new meaning to: c ya, lex.
12
penz...@my-deja.com
Saint Xine <xine.@sjöholm.altavista.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:45:06 GMT, penz...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> Here are a few suggestions:
>
> 1. Lex is a tired c and hangs out at the VD clinic.
>
> 2. Lex is not a deaf c but pretends she is.
>
> 3. Lex is a scientology shill c and Erin pulls her strings.
>
> 4. Lex isn't particularly fastidious about personal hygiene so
> everyone knows she is a c.
...well Scientology is the matter with her. She was/is very devoted
Scientologist. She used to bully other Scientologists same way as she
now bullies and attacks against other critics. Same old saga
continues, never defend always attack....
--
The Church of Scientology is both an interesting
and important new religious movement. It is
interesting because its operating values are in
the area of logical, rationalist thought.
-- Christine Norstrand aka Saint Xine
Saint Xine
>In article <314vvsco175lg7cu9...@4ax.com>,
> Saint Xine <xine.@sjöholm.altavista.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:45:06 GMT, penz...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Here are a few suggestions:
>>
>> 1. Lex is a tired c and hangs out at the VD clinic.
>>
>> 2. Lex is not a deaf c but pretends she is.
>>
>> 3. Lex is a scientology shill c and Erin pulls her strings.
>>
>> 4. Lex isn't particularly fastidious about personal hygiene so
>> everyone knows she is a c.
>
>...well Scientology is the matter with her. She was/is very devoted
>Scientologist. She used to bully other Scientologists same way as she
>now bullies and attacks against other critics. Same old saga
>continues, never defend always attack....
Hey you spelled it correctly this time!
I don't attack other critics, Lex. I just attack you, c? Almost makes
me reconsider eugenics.
17
penz...@my-deja.com
Saint Xine <xine.@sjöholm.altavista.net> wrote:
..you attack everyone. Same way as you attacked against critics while
you were in Scn. Have you forgot what you did then to critics? What
about your fellow scientologists who trusted you their personal
problems?
I think your problem is that you are a zero. All there is in you is
hate. Nobody respects you. Nobody likes you. No bf, just boring power
games you play on net. Even Sten rejected you :). Geesh get rejected by
Swedish Stalinist. :)You are such a pathetic old girl.
Monica Pignotti
penz...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <3kavvs8tuj621pj95...@4ax.com>,
> Saint Xine <xine.@sjöholm.altavista.net> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 05:13:22 GMT, penz...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > I don't attack other critics, Lex. I just attack you, c? Almost
makes
> > me reconsider eugenics.
>
> ..you attack everyone. Same way as you attacked against critics while
> you were in Scn. Have you forgot what you did then to critics? What
> about your fellow scientologists who trusted you their personal
> problems?
You seem to be assuming that all Scientologists are involved in fair
game type of attacks on critics. This is not the case. There are
specialized posts within the Scientology within what is now OSA and
what used to be the Guardian's Office that do these sort of actions.
The average Scientologist and even Scientology staff members in other
positions, for the most part, have no idea of what goes on. AFAIK,
Xine was never in the GO or OSA. Most Scientologists just censor out
critics and are not involved in dirty tricks on them.
--
Monica Pignotti
Patrick L. Humphrey
>In article <3kavvs8tuj621pj95...@4ax.com>,
> Saint Xine <xine.@sjöholm.altavista.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 05:13:22 GMT, penz...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> I don't attack other critics, Lex. I just attack you, c? Almost makes
>> me reconsider eugenics.
>..you attack everyone. Same way as you attacked against critics while
>you were in Scn. Have you forgot what you did then to critics? What
>about your fellow scientologists who trusted you their personal
>problems?
He attacks everyone? Funny, but he's never attacked me -- and I've only
been a critic of the fraud known as the "Church" of Scientology for the past
five years or so. (Of course, it doesn't hurt that I'm in the nation's
fourth-largest city, one that only has a mission, not an org -- and said
mission, most days, is less active than the cemetery about five miles on out
the major street it's on.)
>I think your problem is that you are a zero. All there is in you is
>hate. Nobody respects you. Nobody likes you. No bf, just boring power
>games you play on net. Even Sten rejected you :). Geesh get rejected by
>Swedish Stalinist. :)You are such a pathetic old girl.
I guess this is more of your Oat Tea Powerz, right?
I guess I'm $360,000 ahead of you right from the beginning, then -- I've
read 'em for free, and I didn't have to give a penny to your cult of clams.
--PLH, which makes me an SP 3, a confirmed 1.1, and you're just jealous that
the voices talk to *me* and don't charge me for the privilege :)
Birgitta
>In article <3kavvs8tuj621pj95...@4ax.com>,
> Saint Xine <xine.@sjöholm.altavista.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 05:13:22 GMT, penz...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> I don't attack other critics, Lex. I just attack you, c? Almost makes
>> me reconsider eugenics.
>
>..you attack everyone. Same way as you attacked against critics while
>you were in Scn. Have you forgot what you did then to critics? What
>about your fellow scientologists who trusted you their personal
>problems?
>
>I think your problem is that you are a zero. All there is in you is
>hate. Nobody respects you. Nobody likes you. No bf, just boring power
>games you play on net. Even Sten rejected you :). Geesh get rejected by
>Swedish Stalinist. :)You are such a pathetic old girl.
Hey .... I'm a Swede and I love Xine. Does that count ?
c 1
Bid - The Angel of Xenu
lame...@cotse.com
> I think it is: I think Diane is inherently displaying the early
> trends of paranoid and megalomaniac behaviour...
>
> _____ | | / /
> / \ \ /
>-- -| Duck! | \__ ____ /
> \_____/ / \ / \ | Da...@xemu.demon.co.uk
> /| / You \ / | \ \
> / |_\called?/__/ / | |_____________/////////
>< |____\_______| | |(______________ ()
> \ | \ / () | () | | \\\\\\\\\
> \| | __|__ | |
> _|___/___ \___ | | TWOING !!!
> __---- ----__\---\_
> / __ | ______________________
> \____-------------______/ \ / \
> / / / / _/ ---| hmm, it theemth |
> / \ / / / | i thlighly |
> / $ / / | mithtook |
> / / / | your meaning there, |
> | | / | buthtah !!! |
> \______________// \______________________/
> \________/
We can tell by this ASCII 'art' sig you must know what you're talking about.
k_blo...@my-deja.com
I think Diane can be called a 'sophist'. She enjoyed arguing and winning
an argument - just for the hell of it! But she would never admit she
lost an argument (or part of it) in the name of furthering the truth.
I don't want to be unfair to her but maybe she would be the ideal
'Sophist Hired Out For All Occasions' :-)
Klaus Bloemker
Frankfurt
Dave Bird
What, pray, is the connection between my taste or ability in drawing
and Diane's megalomania?
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
www.xemu.demon.co.uk 2B0D 5195 337B A3E6 DDAC BD38 7F2F FD8E 7391 F44F
Saint Xine
>
>
>
>Dave Bird wrote:
>>
>> In article<973104645.3...@webmail.cotse.com>,
>> lame...@cotse.com writes:
>> >On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 03:05:41 +0000, Dave Bird wrote:
>> >
>> >> I think it is: I think Diane is inherently displaying the early
>> >> trends of paranoid and megalomaniac behaviour...
>> >
I suppose this could be taken as more evidence that Diane is a Hubbardite.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> _____ | | / /
>> >> / \ \ /
>> >>-- -| Duck! | \__ ____ /
>> >> \_____/ / \ / \ | Da...@xemu.demon.co.uk
>> >> /| / You \ / | \ \
>> >> / |_\called?/__/ / | |_____________/////////
>> >>< |____\_______| | |(______________ ()
>> >> \ | \ / () | () | | \\\\\\\\\
>> >> \| | __|__ | |
>> >> _|___/___ \___ | | TWOING !!!
>> >> __---- ----__\---\_
>> >> / __ | ______________________
>> >> \____-------------______/ \ / \
>> >> / / / / _/ ---| hmm, it theemth |
>> >> / \ / / / | i thlighly |
>> >> / $ / / | mithtook |
>> >> / / / | your meaning there, |
>> >> | | / | buthtah !!! |
>> >> \______________// \______________________/
>> >> \________/
>> >
>> >
>> >We can tell by this ASCII 'art' sig you must know what you're talking about.
>>
>> What, pray, is the connection between my taste or ability in drawing
>> and Diane's megalomania?
>
>A fish...
>>
specifically, a flounder.
barb
A fish...
>
> |~/ |~/
> ~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
> P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
> O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
> O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
> L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
> www.xemu.demon.co.uk 2B0D 5195 337B A3E6 DDAC BD38 7F2F FD8E 7391 F44F
--
Barb
Chaplain, ARSCC
ref...@bway.net
wrote:
Both are nonexistent.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Raptavio
Wow, you learned all that about Dave from two posts?
--
Raptavio, King of ARSCC(wdne) Intelligentsia
Diane Richardson
Two posts? Rather more like 2,000 posts over the past
5 years. I guess you must be an a.r.s. newbie.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Dave Bird
>On Sat, 04 Nov 2000 05:18:09 GMT, Raptavio wrote:
>>In article <3a02d49...@enews.newsguy.com>, referen yapped:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2 Nov 2000 22:07:03 +0000, Dave Bird wrote:
>>> >In article<973104645.3a006605a23a0@>,lameduck writes:
>>> >>On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 03:05:41 +0000, Dave Bird wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I think it is: I think Diane is inherently displaying the early
>>> >>> trends of paranoid and megalomaniac behaviour...
>>> >>>
>>> >>> _____ | | / /
>>> >>> / \ \ /
>>> >>>-- -| Duck! | \__ ____ /
>>> >>> \_____/ / \ / \ | Da...@xemu.demon.co.uk
>>> >>> /| / You \ / | \ \
>>> >>> / |_\called?/__/ / | |_____________/////////
>>> >>>< |____\_______| | |(______________ ()
>>> >>> \ | \ / () | () | | \\\\\\\\\
>>> >>> \| | __|__ | |
>>> >>> _|___/___ \___ | | TWOING !!!
>>> >>> __---- ----__\---\_
>>> >>> / __ | ________________
>>> >>> / / / / _/ ---| hmm, it theemth |
>>> >>> / \ / / / | i thlighly |
>>> >>> / $ / / | mithtook |
>>> >>> / / / |your meaning there,
>>> >>> | | / | buthtah !!! |
>>> >>> \________/
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>We can tell by this ASCII 'art' sig you must
>>> >>know what you're talking about.
>>> >
>>> > What, pray, is the connection between my taste or ability
>>> > in drawing and Diane's megalomania?
>>>
>>> Both are nonexistent.
>>
>>Wow, you learned all that about Dave from two posts?
>
What, all with the duck on them ???
ptsc
>>Two posts? Rather more like 2,000 posts
> What, all with the duck on them ???
Why a duck?
ptsc
Raptavio
> 5 years. I guess you must be an a.r.s. newbie.
Naw, Diane, just kinda prodding you for drawing extreme conclusions as
often as you do.
Dave Bird
>On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Dave Bird <da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>cite:
>>>cite:
>>>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> _____ | | / /
>>>> >>> / \ \ /
>>>> >>>-- -| Duck! | \__ ____ /
>>>> >>> \_____/ / \ / \ | Da...@xemu.demon.co.uk
>>>> >>> /| / You \ / | \ \
>>>> >>> / |_\called?/__/ / | |_____________/////////
>>>> >>>< |____\_______| | |(______________ ()
>>>> >>> \ | \ / () | () | | \\\\\\\\\
>>>> >>> \| | __|__ | |
>>>> >>> _|___/___ \___ | | TWOING !!!
>>>> >>> __---- ----__\---\_
>>>> >>> / __ | _______________
>>>> >>> / / / / _/ ---/ hm, it theemth |
>>>> >>> / \ / / / / i thlighly |
>>>> >>> / $ / / / mithtook your |
>>>> >>> / / / / meaning there, |
>>>> >>> | | / | there, buthtah ! |
>>>> >>> \______________// \___________________/
>>>> >>> \________/
>>>>
>>>
>>>Two posts? Rather more like 2,000 posts
>>
>
>Why a duck?
Because I haven't got a sig with a chicken.