--- In [email protected], "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote: > > Dear Turq, I ain't muck raking and I certainly ain't making > this stuff up neither. It just happens to be journalism > reporting. ...
Self-important, biased, oh poor us "journalism." :-) > Well, you see in checking up with and interviewing the people > I ran across, this account of the "facebook dome bannings" > came out. The people who told it in mixed company with-held > the names involved but if pressed they could give them as the > people involved were known to them. I didn't need the names > to know so I left it. Apparently it was two people who were > banned from the domes from their Facebook comments. The > account was quite credible enough. To you. Because of your biases and what you focus on. It's NOT that I don't doubt it; I doubt you. Your whole self-importance act revolves around this "persecution of the dome-goers" bit. If it's true, I stick with my original assessment of "a cult gone mad," but with some caveats to remind you that Fairfield is not the center of the universe you seem to think it is, nor is the cult. My "journalism" of this, if it were true, would be more like this: "In a backwater town in Iowa that most people on the planet have never heard of, two people that almost no one on the planet have heard of feel that they were discriminated against by their former cult, which has so fallen from favor that almost no one knows about it any more either, or cares. The two people discrim- inated against were not allowed to go twice a day to a big room full of other cult hangers-on and bounce around on their butts on slabs of foam, believing that doing this would make their minds 10,000X more powerful than normal people's minds, and would cause world peace, end global warming, and do all sorts of other stuff they'd made up to feel more important. The alleged 'persecution' of its members by this cult that no one cares about any more is mad, but no less so than the cult's members believing that anyone cares about it, or them." :-) > --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > > > More recently they've taken to mining Facebook pages of > > > people on the Course, looking at the "Most Admired" lists > > > and then taking badges away by following up on that. > > > > To be perfectly honest, "Buck," I have come to take > > the things you say with more than a grain of salt. It > > seems to me that you sometimes go out of your way to > > find things to manufacture outrage over or or to be > > paranoid about. > > > > So you will have to forgive me if I inquire deeper > > into this claim. Is this something that you or people > > you have talked to *claim*, or is it something they > > could attest to, like in a court of law? > > > > The former we can write off to ex-cultists' paranoia > > about what their former cult might do to them. The > > latter would be a cult gone mad.
