To Out of the Dark/Mary McConnell
Voltaire's
You've been giving me unwanted advice from the get go. I've had
enough. In the past, when I was an indie Scientologist and was tired
of being slammed by you, I tried reaching out to you via email.
However, that did not help. Rapprochment was not facilitated. You did
not treat me like a human benig until I said I wasn't a Scientologist
any more. You then wrote, as I recall, "Welcome Home." I remember
thinking. "But I'm the same person I was before. Why be nice now and
not before?" but to keep the peace, I went along with it.
You friended me on Facebook. I was like, sure, ok.
In the past few months you've chided me for talking back to R Hill
(whom I actually think is a nice person and an effective critic. We
just ended up with a misunderstanding that one time.) but not because
of the tiff, but because it was him. Like there's some kind of
hierarchy in critic-land and there're people to whom I must give
altitude. Sorry, but that's nonsense. I do not give altitude to
anyone, even people I think are really helpful and good, like R. Hill.
You mocked me for posting on ESMB last June about how horrible I was
feeling. You commented at the time that I'd created some mystery
sandwich. Well, I get that, but your having posted "LOL" on that
thread was truly bizarre and not good at all. LOL means laughing out
loud. I was feeling lower than whaleshit that day, having been in the
process of working out something extremely delicate.
Later, you chided me for telling Magoo not to call me "fluffers". She
and I had discussed that repeatedly on OCMB a couple years ago. It
wasn't a new thing. I think you didn't know that. I think you had no
idea how lengthy and repetitive that discussion had become.
At some point, you unfriended me on Facebook. Well, that's fine. I
mean, if you can't deal with me being me, then you shouldn't be
reading my stuff or anything like that. As I recall, you expressed
dismay over my alluding to Larry Toomajian's many many nicks here
since you thought he deserved a chance on ESMB. Of course, we know
what happened later.
And, lately, you did not like my thread about making Bill Yaude a
bogeyman in conjunction with commenting about other contributors. You
felt I was unjustly criticizing Tory. Maybe I am wrong, maybe I'm not,
but it's not for you to say. You yourself have not been shy about
targetting both Pooks and Dennis Ehrlich, right? You commented about
fanning flames right after reproving someone else (besides me, for a
change) for their posts on that same thread. Isn't that a bit
inconsistent?
You mentioned a game you think I have with Tory and with Ladybird.
Yes, I don't get along with either one. That's just how it is. That's
how it always will be. I've spoken on the phone to both of them and
after those conversations (which were mostly nice) the same sorts of
things happened. I probably have the same thoughts about that sort of
thing as anyone else would, if they were to experience them. It's not
a game. It's just a situation where things have been said about me and
I reacted aggressively, the same way I would if someone walked up to
me and grabbed me. Actually, that has happened. I live in a big city.
Once I was elbowed extremely painfully and viciously, another time
groped (butt was bigger then and I think it was sticking waaaay out
and must have been too much of a temptation) and one I caught someone
with his hand just BURIED in my purse. My reactions to all those
people was quite vicious, actually. That's how I roll.
I also react to people who treat me with respect. I defend them, I do
things for them- I've sent money and bought things for people who
needed it (and who didn't ask me for a thing, either.) and I've gone
the extra mile for them.
So it depends on what happens, really.
I also want to take the opportunity to say that I do not want your
religion crammed down my throat. When I was an Indie Scn'ist, I never
told you that you should heed the words of L Ron Hubbard. So I'd
really appreciate it if you would back off the bible talk. I do not
believe in the bible. I am not Jewish, Christian or a Moslem. I do try
to refrain from mocking those beliefs but if you don't stop quoting
the bible at me, I'm going to write something extremely blistering
about Xtianity and you are not going to like it.
Don't tell me what to do. Don't write about me, since you seem to take
exception to my responding to those posts. It's simple as this: Do not
write about "Claire does this, Claire does that" and you won't need to
worry about fans being flamed.
I've been working really hard on controlling my temper with fucktards
who write about my marriage, job, personal appearance, who lie about
my history with CofS and who demand that I post my case or training
level- and in the past 6 or so months I've done much better. But it's
not going so well now because I'm dealing with an annoying Jeeboid
hypocrite who posts her thoughts about others than has a shitless cow
when someone else has the temerity to do so - if it's about a person
or stance you think shoudl be left alone.
Dennis L Erlich
They say a stopped clock is right twice a day. But Mary OOHerMind
just keeps on going and going like the battery bunny.
D
"Voltaire's" <Voltair...@ymail.com> wrote:
-------------------------
"And when there's too much of nothing
Nobody should look. - B. Dylan
The Alien Krlll
> Fluff,
>
> They say a stopped clock is right twice a day. But Mary OOHerMind
> just keeps on going and going like the battery bunny.
>
> D
Do you really want to start up again? Start insulting people and we
will go round again.
John Dorsay
Hi Fluff! Always nice to see you!
> In the past few months you've chided me for talking back to R Hill
> (whom I actually think is a nice person and an effective critic. We
> just ended up with a misunderstanding that one time.) but not because
> of the tiff, but because it was him. Like there's some kind of
> hierarchy in critic-land and there're people to whom I must give
> altitude. Sorry, but that's nonsense. I do not give altitude to
> anyone, even people I think are really helpful and good, like R. Hill.
Ray's awesome. That doesn't mean he's perfect, and I bet he would be
the first to agree with that.
Self-righteous morons don't get that disagreements and
misunderstandings arise between normal people. They also don't get
that normal people like one another because of the person, not
because of whether or not they always agree.
I doubt that Mary could possibly understand why critics like me and
Peach and Dennis and countless others liked and respected you when
you were in, still liked and respected you when you were
independent, and continue to like and respect you now that you are
out. They think it has something to do with what Kook Tom K
identifies as the "in-crowd, a kind of cult in its own right, with
its own secrets." Welcome to our sooper-sekrit in-crowd, Fluff!
John
PS if you hung around here again, you could just killfile all the
knobs :)
Dennis L Erlich
>I doubt that Mary could possibly understand why critics like me and
>Peach and Dennis and countless others liked and respected you when
>you were in, still liked and respected you when you were
>independent, and continue to like and respect you now that you are
>out.
Fluff has always been ok with me. Because she has never had a closed
mind. She is always willing to consider different ideas without
getting defensive. And she would never use tek or anything else to
harm anyone.
D
-----------------------
"We can cure cancer. We just can't ~say~ we can." - Elrong Hubturd (XDn Tape 2)
Voltaire's
> On 3/2/2011 3:08 PM, Voltaire's wrote:
>
> Hi Fluff! Always nice to see you!
>
> > In the past few months you've chided me for talking back to R Hill
> > (whom I actually think is a nice person and an effective critic. We
> > just ended up with a misunderstanding that one time.) but not because
> > of the tiff, but because it was him. Like there's some kind of
> > hierarchy in critic-land and there're people to whom I must give
> > altitude. Sorry, but that's nonsense. I do not give altitude to
> > anyone, even people I think are really helpful and good, like R. Hill.
>
> Ray's awesome. That doesn't mean he's perfect, and I bet he would be
> the first to agree with that.
Well, I was in the wrong when I fought with him that one time last
year. But I did NOT need Mary pulling her sententious fucking crap
and lecturing me. She's been writing about me for the past year as if
she were my freaking Mommy or something.
Hey, Mary-- bitch, I don't need another mom. And fuck your god, too.
>
> Self-righteous morons don't get that disagreements and
> misunderstandings arise between normal people. They also don't get
> that normal people like one another because of the person, not
> because of whether or not they always agree.
What gets me is she goes on and on about how I shouldn't say this or
that and I'm fanning the flames, while she posted a link to an earlier
(inflammatory/controversial) in a reply of hers on a really flamey
thread on ESMB- a different one.
It's like it's ok for her to do stuff but not me.
She also is quite sure that there's some kind of critical hierarchy.
Tory, Ray and a few others are at the top of the heap and I'm
somewhere at the bottom. Now, me, I'd rather not think of it that way.
I mean, yeah, there are people who've done more than I but I don't
defer to them. When they say something that's valuable, I listen. If
they don't, well, then I don't think of them as beyond reproach.
Remember when I publicly killfiled Gerry Armstrong here a few years
ago? I shouldn't have done it, but not because he's an uber opinion
leader and better than me or something, but because with that, it
turned into such a free for all that I should not have bothered. But
thing was, a number of people who were displeased seemed displeased
because of who I was/am and who Gerry is. That's just not a good
enough reason. And Mary's kinda doing the same thing now.
Mary sits on her high horse and talks about a game she says I'm
having. She needs to ask herself why I would not be too thrilled with
those two people. There was stuff written that would almost curl even
my (resolutely straight) hair. And she does not think I should say
anything.
I will admit this- it's unwise of me to take these people on but
mainly because they are consistently unfair and consistently lie about
me and have tried to intimidate me. John has a saying "don't expect
them to make sense 'cuz they never will." He's right. But as to doing
anything morally wrong? Oh gosh, NO! No, it's more a tactical error
like wasting time talking to some street crazy.
And shouldn't Mary look at the stuff she's written about Pooks and
Dennis? Those weren't polite statements of disagreement with views,
those were personal attacks.
>
> I doubt that Mary could possibly understand why critics like me and
> Peach and Dennis and countless others liked and respected you when
> you were in, still liked and respected you when you were
> independent, and continue to like and respect you now that you are
> out.
Some of them would respect me if I would just do what I'm told, I
think. Mary's like that. Some people, though, are so furious with me
for my past flames (particularly on OCMB) that they'll never ever
respect me. But they don't look at the outrageous shit that quite a
few forum regulars wrote about me. They need to get their heads out of
their asses. They've expressed dismay when they thought I was being
critical of them and they feel free to do that. Yet they do not accord
this privilege to all others.
>They think it has something to do with what Kook Tom K
> identifies as the "in-crowd, a kind of cult in its own right, with
> its own secrets." Welcome to our sooper-sekrit in-crowd, Fluff!
Can I get a decoder ring?? Please??
>
> John
>
> PS if you hung around here again, you could just killfile all the
> knobs :)
I sometimes drop by. It's nice to see some of the old gang (not to say
that any of us are old, of course. I myself don't look a day over 75
trillion). I think I'll drop by a little more.
C
Voltaire's
> John Dorsay <restimula...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I doubt that Mary could possibly understand why critics like me and
> >Peach and Dennis and countless others liked and respected you when
> >you were in, still liked and respected you when you were
> >independent, and continue to like and respect you now that you are
> >out.
>
> Fluff has always been ok with me. Because she has never had a closed
> mind. She is always willing to consider different ideas without
> getting defensive. And she would never use tek or anything else to
> harm anyone.
>
Nope. Unlike people who fling bible quotes at others.
Also, you guys, I got censored. I'm going to post a separate thread
about that.
C
realpch
Pssst! The next meeting's Friday in the basement of the Pizza Hut, you
know where.
Peach
--
Extra! Extra! Read All About It!
Save some dough, save some grief:
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.scientology-lies.com
John Dorsay
> Pssst! The next meeting's Friday in the basement of the Pizza Hut, you
> know where.
You know, Peach, my doctor just increased my blood pressure
medication, and she also gave me a stern warning to limit my
consumption of fatty foods.
Unless you can find someone who can provide proof that the more salt
you ingest the lower your blood pressure drops, and that high fat
foods reduce cholesterol, I'm going to have request a change of venue.
Besides, after four and a half years of nothing but pizza, maybe we
could consider Mexican or something?
John
realpch
Ok, let's switch it to the dungeon beneath Pizza Hut, where you get
nothing but kelp and sprouts on whole wheat sandwiches. It's the place
of torture for people who have eaten far too much pizza and potato
chips. Why I'm there now!
:-p
Out_Of_The_Dark
Like I said, before Emma closed that thread,
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=544066#post544066
" Anything to keep the flame alive seems to be your motto on getting
even with those you are 'argument entangled' with. Nuff said. "
Nuff is nuff in my book.
ps: I am not on facebook. And when I was ( before Narconon flagged my
account over a year ago and tried to get me to produce ID to try to
sue me, which I refused to provide), I never had you as a friend on my
list. My facebook was used to expose Narconon and connect up with
Narconon victims.
I have no idea who you are posting about regards facebook and comments
attributed to me but they were not made by me. In looking at your
facebook friend list, there is a Mary Lee. Perhaps that is who you
write of? Well, that is not me.
Mary
Skipper
<ceb05b82-4612-43e5...@a8g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
Out_Of_The_Dark <formerl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Claire,
> Like I said, before Emma closed that thread,
> http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=544066#post544066
>
> " Anything to keep the flame alive seems to be your motto on getting
> even with those you are 'argument entangled' with. Nuff said. "
>
> Nuff is nuff in my book.
It's never enough for you. Combativeness probably learned while in the
cult is where you live. You once accused me of ridiculous stuff with
Laura Hippe thought I saved her life once and she was a deeply
disturbed long-term alcoholic who constantly lied (and as a successful
actress was very good at it). "Anything to keep the flame alive" is
your psychological projection, dear. Learn to meditate or something.
Voltaire's
>
> " Anything to keep the flame alive seems to be your motto on getting
> even with those you are 'argument entangled' with. Nuff said. "
>
> Nuff is nuff in my book.
Then don't come in on my threads on ESMB and lecture me. You've done
it several times. I'm goddamn sick of it.
>
> ps: I am not on facebook. And when I was ( before Narconon flagged my
> account over a year ago and tried to get me to produce ID to try to
> sue me, which I refused to provide), I never had you as a friend on my
> list. My facebook was used to expose Narconon and connect up with
> Narconon victims.
That's simply not true. I had a friend request from you, and accepted
it. We were facebook friends for a while. You'd sent me a Thanksgiving
greeting one time and we had a brief friendly discussion about food.
Later, you were no longer in amongst my FB friends. Maybe it's cuz you
nuked your account.
>
> I have no idea who you are posting about regards facebook and comments
> attributed to me but they were not made by me. In looking at your
> facebook friend list, there is a Mary Lee. Perhaps that is who you
> write of? Well, that is not me.
>
I have been talking about two things on a.r.s. this week.
1) Your lecturing me and the shit you've said to me on ESMB. Sorry I
said you unfriended me on FB, but we *were* FB friends back when you
had an account there. Then, when you dropped off my list, since you'd
been flipping me shit, I just figured you unfriended me. But deleting
your account would have the same effect, the person then drops off the
other people's friends list since they're not on FB.
2) the censorship and intimidation I've been experiencing which were
these:
1) someone- I know exactly who, it's a guy and I do have his name-
tried to get me in trouble on Facebook. I explained the
circumstances.
He's not you.
2) Several people bitched about my avatar on ESMB. I know at least one
for sure. I never said you were one of them which is good since you've
told me today that you weren't.
But I view it as censorship and intimidation. I don't have a problem
with Emma or her mods. But I do have a problem with those other
people. I've described my feelings in my editorial on www.claireswazey.com
3) Someone complained to photobucket about some of my husband's
humorous JPGs I had on there. This is quite recent, by the way. And to
do that, they had to go and actually look at them. So that's redonk.
I've been receiving pressure and censorship in the critic's community
lately. I'm not one to put up with it. I react exactly the way people
react when they get pressure from the cult. They push back and they
publish it everywhere. Now, the censorship, you tell me, didn't come
from you. And I never said it did and I am indeed pleased to know that
you didn't stoop to that level.
But you have been attempting to intimidate me for several months now
and I am so fucking sick of it I could scream.
C
Voltaire's
> John Dorsay wrote:
>
> > On 3/3/2011 2:33 PM, realpch wrote:
>
> > > Pssst! The next meeting's Friday in the basement of the Pizza Hut, you
> > > know where.
>
> > You know, Peach, my doctor just increased my blood pressure
> > medication, and she also gave me a stern warning to limit my
> > consumption of fatty foods.
>
> > Unless you can find someone who can provide proof that the more salt
> > you ingest the lower your blood pressure drops, and that high fat
> > foods reduce cholesterol, I'm going to have request a change of venue.
>
> > Besides, after four and a half years of nothing but pizza, maybe we
> > could consider Mexican or something?
>
> > John
>
> Ok, let's switch it to the dungeon beneath Pizza Hut, where you get
> nothing but kelp and sprouts on whole wheat sandwiches. It's the place
> of torture for people who have eaten far too much pizza and potato
> chips. Why I'm there now!
>
> :-p
>
Oh dear god, kelp and sprouts. Can't we find something for John that's
ok with his blood pressure that would taste good?
Does this really mean that ARSCC (wdne) is going to stop holding its
cabals (with the buttersquash conspiracy meetings in the adjoining
room) at Pizza Hut?
Ok, party at Fluffy's house. Just let me know when so that I can get
everything vaccumed and get the food ready...
C
Out_Of_The_Dark
To my knowledge, you were never my facebook friend and unless you can
post some proof of that, the discussion is over for me about this.
I have no idea what you are talking about in this and the other thread
and as I said beefore, nuff is enough.
Don't expect any further replies.
realpch
Sure will, but you can't serve fried turkey butts with Limon potato
chips, ok?
Jommy Cross
<Voltair...@ymail.com> wrote in msg
<a5aebd51-4345-425c...@o14g2000prb.googlegroups.com>:
Fluff! So great to hear from you.
<snip>
>I also want to take the opportunity to say that I do not want your
>religion crammed down my throat. When I was an Indie Scn'ist, I never
>told you that you should heed the words of L Ron Hubbard. So I'd
>really appreciate it if you would back off the bible talk. I do not
>believe in the bible. I am not Jewish, Christian or a Moslem. I do try
>to refrain from mocking those beliefs but if you don't stop quoting
>the bible at me, I'm going to write something extremely blistering
>about Xtianity and you are not going to like it.
<snip>
It's no good being cruel to Xtians, imho. They love it.
Try some wrong agreements. It's worked for me with OutOfTheDog.
Ever yours in fandom,
Jommy Cross
---------------------------------------------------
This message brought to you by Radio Free Albemuth:
before you hallucinate
--------------------------------------------------
Voltaire's Child
"Out_Of_The_Dark" <formerl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:609000f7-c4a8-4a19...@w7g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
Don't worry about it. It's a non issue. I mean, I don't give a shit. It's an
account you don't even have any more. It's soooo not what this is about.
We had very little interaction when you had the account, but there was that
Thansiving day exchange which I think was in 2009. Your account was under
your Mary McConnell nick. But, chica, I really do not give a damn. Like I
said, it's a non issue. You seem to think I'm accusing you of doing
something to me on Facebook. I am not. I'm accusing you of being a dick to
me on ESMB.
>I have no idea what you are talking about in this and the other thread
>and as I said beefore, nuff is enough.
I am talking about your shitty behavior to me on ESMB. You've lectured me
several times now on there and it came to a head last week in the Eek Bill
Yaude thread.
> Don't expect any further replies.
What I'm looking for is for you to leave me the fuck alone on ESMB. I don't
give a damn whether or not you respond to this thread.
This would be a blessing.
C
Voltaire's Child
"Jommy Cross" <jommycross@[127.1]> wrote in message
news:CYWFQM4M4060...@reece.net.au...
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:08:34 -0800 (PST), "Voltaire's"
> <Voltair...@ymail.com> wrote in msg
> <a5aebd51-4345-425c...@o14g2000prb.googlegroups.com>:
>
> Fluff! So great to hear from you.
Yo!
>
> Try some wrong agreements. It's worked for me with OutOfTheDog.
She seems to be having some memory problems.
C
Voltaire's Child
some reason, she won't come here and discuss anything, but she does
read my stuff here. This isn't the first time she read (and
unbelievably stupidly mangled) something I wrote here.
So she said (on this particular ESMB thread that has nothing to do
with any of that that she never reported me. Ok, but did I ever say
she did? No, I didn't. So that makes it odd.
Also, in this particular thread here, where I have, indeed, mentioned
Ladybird, I described some names she called me. She now claims she
never called me a cochon, and that she used the term "pied de cochon"
re one of my posts, on one occasion but that was the only thing.
Actually, no, that's not what I was thinking of. For this woman who
oft times says: "Google is your friend", I'd suggest actually putting
that into practice.
http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?p=229116
Says "Especially having seen your picture, fluffy cochon.
Ladybird, really-- you need to just make sure you don't shoot yourself
in the foot. The only reason I disdain you is because of the manner in
which you talk about and to me such as in the thread mentioned above
(http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=546006&postcount=29).
By the way, folks, the references to my being "an expert" which she
makes here and also in another thread that she posted that week, are
because I signed up for all experts.com and if you answer questions
there, you are an "expert". I also used to answer questions on a
couple other question and answer boards. Everyone else has had the
same opportunities I have had to participate in a forum where they are
referred to as such.
Then comes some weird thing she threw in about "out 2d'. The only
thing I said about it was that I answered an a.r.s. post a few days
ago about "out 2"- one of the many "Barbarella" posts. I'm not sure
why this should be a problem for Ladybird for me to answer an a.r.s.
post. I mean, I've only been doing that since 1998. This forum is what
got me out of CofS and into criticizing it and eventually shooting a
video of DM opening the Seattle Idle Org which, believe me, the cult
would rather I'd not have shot and posted to you tube.
I'm also not sure what it is she thinks I've not learned about the
cult, considering I've written post after post about the way it treats
its staff, swindles people out of retirement money, coerces abortions
and so on. Just a couple weeks ago I wrote a post on ESMB about my
recent discovery that someone I knew (and liked) in the cult had
actually gone hungry (she was on staff) before she died.
This is sooo nuts!
Claire
Alert
wrote:
>won't come here and discuss anything,
Would that be because the ONLY reason you started your BAWWWWING in
this outlet was to garner an audience and some sort of perceived back-
slapping/back-up?
> This is sooo nuts!
No shit sherlock.
> Claire
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting
different results.
Albert Einstein
Voltaire's Child
"Alert" <flickin...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:92e5fe54-a719-4a2e...@t15g2000prt.googlegroups.com...
Hi,
How are you? Long time no talk. Hope all's well in your neck of the woods.
C
Skipper
<6fb4b91b-3f2c-440d...@b13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Voltaire's Child <Voltair...@ymail.com> wrote:
> This is sooo nuts!
>
> Claire
On both sides.
762#@230*)&($20607f02-7
wrote:
> "Alert" <flicking_you...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Claire, are you still the moderator of the Geir forum? Are forum
postings generally down?
Jommy Cross
<flickin...@hotmail.com> wrote in msg
<92e5fe54-a719-4a2e...@t15g2000prt.googlegroups.com>:
>On Mar 7, 4:23=A0pm, "Voltaire's Child" <Voltaires_Ch...@ymail.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>won't come here and discuss anything,
>
>Would that be because the ONLY reason you started your BAWWWWING in
>this outlet=20
What's ars for if not some BAWWWWING?
>was to garner an audience and some sort of perceived back-
>slapping/back-up?
<snip>
So what's your take on the situation, Alert?
Alert
wrote:
> "Alert" <flicking_you...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> Hi,
> How are you? Long time no talk. Hope all's well in your neck of the woods.
> C
Hi Caire,
I'm better and better as time goes by. The journey is great. The woods
down under is devoid of big bears but full of koalas and kangaroos.
All is good here. Nice weather for the change of season.
Thanks for asking.
Just so you know, I've never "hated" you, even though I have been
venomous toward you in the past and you'd prolly only draw a single
conclusion from such venom.
As you well know, I have maybe one of the narrowest views on Scn/Dn
and is why I can come across as a prick (to say the least)to Indies/
FreeZoners.
On Mar 10, 7:26 am, jommycross@[127.1] (Jommy Cross) wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 00:44:09 -0800 (PST), Alert
> <flicking_you...@hotmail.com> wrote in msg
> <92e5fe54-a719-4a2e-bf42-c6f1324d3...@t15g2000prt.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >On Mar 7, 4:23=A0pm, "Voltaire's Child" <Voltaires_Ch...@ymail.com>
> >wrote:
>
> >>won't come here and discuss anything,
>
> >Would that be because the ONLY reason you started your BAWWWWING in
> >this outlet=20
> What's ars for if not some BAWWWWING?
I guess the likes of RR and the myriad of sock's by a few obsessed
users has pretty much stunk the joint up in the last year. Times have
changed I guess.
> >was to garner an audience and some sort of perceived back-
> >slapping/back-up?
>
> <snip>
> So what's your take on the situation, Alert?
My "take" is that humans will always be humans. There's no doubt
Claire has copped more than her share of criticism and a decent amount
has been unfair in the past. That being said, Claire has had a
tendency to want to bring drama's into other places for some support.
Yes, I have suffered from being hypocritical. But I am constantly
evolving emotionally, like we *all* should.
I still read here daily without a killfile, as I hope to find
something that puts a smile on my face.
You should maybe yank RR's chain (yet again) so I can LOL
Voltaire's Child
>Hi Caire,
>I'm better and better as time goes by. The journey is great. The >woods
>down under is devoid of big bears but full of koalas and >kangaroos.
>All is good here. Nice weather for the change of season.
>Thanks for asking.
>Just so you know, I've never "hated" you, even though I have >been
>venomous toward you in the past and you'd prolly only draw a >single
>conclusion from such venom.
>As you well know, I have maybe one of the narrowest views on >Scn/Dn
>and is why I can come across as a prick (to say the least)to >Indies/
>FreeZoners.
Hi,
Glad things are going well. I figured you weren't particularly happy with me
but then again, when one meets or talks to people one on one, they often are
different than they seem on message boards.
I've kind of moved on from FZ and Indie Scn but am still supportive. My view
is more that it's about ideological choice. I have no use for the
organization and I would not want to see a reformed church because then it
would probably end up like the Who song "meet the new boss, same as the old
boss" even if the person meant well. There are real problems with Hubbard's
policies and I always said so, even in the bad old days on OCMB.
I think people should just be Claireologists, Alertologists, Janeologists,
and so on.
The last two years have been a very bumpy ride for CofS and it will be
interesting to see what happens. I keep expecting Dainty Dave to *steal*
away (pun intended) in the night, making a run for it...
C
Voltaire's Child
"762#@230*)&($20607f02-7" <auto30...@hushmail.com> wrote in message
news:1ab44c2c-ef3c-4edf...@v16g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
>Claire, are you still the moderator of the Geir forum? Are forum
>postings generally down?
I used to the a mod. Now I'm admin. It's called scnforum.org.
It always has been a modest forum.
C
Voltaire's Child
In answer to a comment made the other week, the reason I do sometimes come
to friends seeking support is that there are times when things just get too
heavy. It gets too much. If that seems like "Bawwwing", well, maybe it is,
but then again, I wouldn't dismiss someone's heartfelt feelings that way.
I've been mostly flame free for the better part of a year but a couple weeks
ago, it just got way too bonkers and I fell off the wagon. I admit it. I
fell off with a spectacular BOOM and a bounce.
But as far as looking for support goes, considering some of the flame wars
in which I used to be not only a participant but a subject, well, there sure
were people there looking for support from others in their position. All to
stop one person. So weird.
I know it's best to not mess with this shit, but as John, my husband said,
"You and me, we're a little bit defiant." Isn't there--ahem-- a precedent
for this in the critic's scene? Nobody likes being told that he or she is
bad or given unsolicited advice or to be dumped on or have someone try.
And last week I got threatened with legal action by some nut from the
internet. (Privately.) Hilarious.
I have a temper and I do sometimes whinge a bit, though I was donig pretty
well last six months or so til I had my meltdown the other week. But so
what, I'm human. I'm not sorry.
I also have a new cover page on my website. It's entitled: I already have a
Mom.
Claire
John Dorsay
> And last week I got threatened with legal action by some nut from
> the internet. (Privately.) Hilarious.
Be nice, Fluff! If you have been blessed with genuine kook threats,
the polite thing to do is share them with your friends here (with
full headers, of course).
Besides, if the kook didn't want you to repost the kook threats, the
kook would never have sent them in the first place.
John
Voltaire's Child
"John Dorsay" <restim...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:im37ac$vho$1...@arscc.eternal-september.org...
I'm tempted, believe me. But I'm afraid it might lead to another accusation
of stalking. This person actually accused me of that. And they know my real
name because I, unlike certain chickenshit anonymous people who have so much
to say about my posting nicks and yet use posting nicks themselves, am not
anonymous. I got expelled over it, for gawd's sake.
Well, I'm certainly saving the message. I have shared it with some people
back channel, with headers, and if someday I have to post it, then I will.
But even though this person has clearly been the one to initiate attacks on
my appearance, marriage (my Flag Order parody was copy pasta'd from here to
another forum with the comment that I brag about using unusual sexual
practices with John- which is totally untrue, he's totally vanilla and I
never said anything like that- appended) and quite a few other things. Yet,
the claim was that I stalked this person, not the other way around.
Originally, I thought this person was just blinded by hatred. Then I thought
the person was also rather stupid. Now, I'm thinking it posts while drinking
then can't remember half the stuff it says. There were numerous occasions
where there'd be some comment about "Fluffy says this" and then a half assed
incorrect rendering of what I did say would follow. Well, I thought it was
just "low toned" "lack of duplication" but now I think the person's a drunk.
But drunks can be mean.
C