Amnesties? Um, no.

[ethercat]

There seems to be the perception, accompanied by rumors, that with the changing of admins on ESMB, may come amnesties for those previously banned. Personally, I don't understand why this is, since Mick and I have both said that during the transition, we won't be changing anything.

I will state further, that although some change is inevitable at some time because times and things do change, sometimes things we cannot control, we do not have any changes planned, either for the immediate future, or for when Emma is no longer here on a regular basis.

So for those banned people who may be holding out hope of amnesty, let me state specifically that we are not considering any amnesties at this point.

If, at some time in the future, our plans with regard to amnesties do change, any consideration for specific amnesties will be based on those people's activities and behaviors on the internet at large, so those who may wish to be considered IF and when we might change our plans would do well to proceed with the goals we should all have in common - ending the abuses by the "Church" of Scientology, helping those who need help in adapting to life outside of the cult, and raising awareness in society at large of how the "church" and other cults operate. But do it because it's the right thing to do, not because you hope it will get you amnesty on ESMB.

[palehorse]

Um, would it be appropriate to provide us newbies to the history behind this statement, or are we better off remaing clueless?

[anondelmundial]

I'm having some trouble understanding this statement:

"If, at some time in the future, our plans with regard to amnesties do change, any consideration for specific amnesties will be based on those people's activities and behaviors on the internet at large"

Surely, you don't intend to monitor the "internet at large"?

WTF does this mean? It is completely ambiguous!

[Free to shine]

Um, would it be appropriate to provide us newbies to the history behind this statement, or are we better off remaing clueless?

There is a lot of history, you will find old threads around the place on various disputes if you are interested. There are times when it wasn't pretty and arguments and flame wars only detract from the purpose of ESMB. I don't see a reason to revive any of it.

I agree with Ethercat - "the goals we should all have in common - ending the abuses by the "Church" of Scientology, helping those who need help in adapting to life outside of the cult, and raising awareness in society at large of how the "church" and other cults operate."

[ethercat]

Um, would it be appropriate to provide us newbies to the history behind this statement, or are we better off remaing clueless?

palehorse, I'm sure others can give a more detailed history than I can, but the short version is this:

Some people made a lot of trouble here for Emma, caused a lot of bad feelings and drama on the forum, and were banned for it.

There are mentions elsewhere of possible amnesties, that is unbanning, for the banned people.

It is not something we (that is, Mick and I) are considering at this point, so it's best for those people to know that right up front, instead of them speculating and spreading rumors.

By the way, remaining clueless is something I would never advocate for anyone, although sometimes, some things are just useless knowledge and may not be worth one's time to find out. Your time, your decision.

[Gadfly]

Hey, just follow the Tech!

ESMB is in POWER.

Don't change anything! (The formula for a Power Condition)



And, if you DO ever grant an amnesty, be sure to require FULL O/W write-ups (with F/N at examiner) from all concerned, and a minimum of 50 hours of Sec Checking by at least a Cl VIII auditor able to make a meter read! Lord knows, we have to keep ESMB "standard".

[Free to shine]

I'm having some trouble understanding this statement:

"If, at some time in the future, our plans with regard to amnesties do change, any consideration for specific amnesties will be based on those people's activities and behaviors on the internet at large"

Surely, you don't intend to monitor the "internet at large"?

WTF does this mean? It is completely ambiguous!

I suspect it could mean things like not starting closed Facebook groups to attack Emma, as has happened.

[ethercat]

I'm having some trouble understanding this statement:

"If, at some time in the future, our plans with regard to amnesties do change, any consideration for specific amnesties will be based on those people's activities and behaviors on the internet at large"

Surely, you don't intend to monitor the "internet at large"?

WTF does this mean? It is completely ambiguous!

No, I don't intend to monitor the whole internet, but our super sekrit spies will do it and report back to us.

Just kidding above, if you didn't get that, but you don't think Mick and I are completely oblivious to the rest of the critic community, do you?

[HelluvaHoax!]

...


Possible solution.

MESSAGE TO ALL BANNED TERMINALS

In order to make up the damage you have done, your amends project is to bring back the broom e-meter of the wicked with of the west COB.

[Gadfly]

Just kidding above, if you didn't get that, but you don't think Mick and I are completely oblivious to the rest of the critic community, do you?

Pretty much, I am . . . .