Thank you, Steve. I appreciate the amendment to your earlier statement :-)

Would that others pertinent to this thread were as interested in openly and respectfully communicating.

I'm being deliberately vague re that last statement for a number of reasons. All I feel I can say to elucidate that is... what a weird world I stepped into when I decided to try The Work.

Oy!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/30/2009 07:38AM by helpme2times.

Quote
The Anticult

Byron Katie, as shown probably 100x in this thread, literally and explicitly uses every trick in the book to try and get her fans and followers to literally LOVE her, and ultimately give her EVERYTHING, and love her with all their heart. That is factual reality.
If anything, that is the core agenda of Byron Katie, to make her fans and followers "fall in love" with her. That comes right from her pre-frame advertising, "falling in love at first sight" with her, to her Love-Bombs, and everything else. Its all in this thread.

Another example of Katie's Love-Bombing on Twitter:

Quote

Oh no, oh no, dearest preciousTweeties, I can't love you more than now, no matter how hard I try! Oh well, just have to settle for maximum!
3:19 PM Jun 19th from Tweetie

Can that be any more syrupy sweet?

I need a mega-dose of insulin, stat.

New readers, please click below to read about people's experiences with The Work:

Byron Katie and "The Work" Participant Reports

Social Psychology Experimentation Leaking Through the Computer Screen

We are in a new frontier, now that it has become easy and affordable to create and operate a blog.

Whilst reading and commenting on various and sundry blogs, I have noticed that if a particular individual comments frequently on a particular blog, using an identifiable handle or especially if that person uses his or her first or full name, I eventually come to feel as though that person is a like neighbor.

They become a familiar presence. Gradually, I feel as though I 'know' the person, even though in truth, I do not know that person at all. I only know what he or she types.

I never 'knew' Michael Jackson.

But I was surprised at how shocked I heard he had died.

In a subtle manner, via media and even through blogging, either owning one, corresponding on one, or both, a bonding process can take place that does an end-run around one's intellect and education.

It is possible to feel a subtle connection with someone who is a media or even just a cyber-presence, a ghost of sorts. We can think that we know this person, are friends with this person, that this person is friends with us, forgetting it is merely a bunch of pixils on a screen, and forget one doesnt actually know the person at all.

This is why we give attention to how recruitment can happen via web venues and blogs.

Helpme2times has had direct experience in that area.

It is easy to read this and unconsciously bristle, thinking, 'Theyre telling me I am a fool'.

One thing cult apologists do is try to frame cult education as an insulting and demeaning message that you are a weak person and fool needing paternalistic protection..

Then, when you're feeling pissed off, the apologist slips it in that their operation is the one that offers you adult validation and true liberation.

What we are discussing is a process that is so new to communication techology that even the brightest and most educated among us have not yet charted its full implications.

We are living in the midst of social psychology experiment that is vast and that is not being done by the guidelines of the American Psychological Association.

And if you have computer and go online, some tentacles of this unregulated experiment will reach right through your screen and into your head and because you are not told you're being pulled into an experiment where others stand to profit, you cant utilize your street smarts, no matter how smart you are.

That is why physicians and attorneys are told that whenever possible, do not treat members of your family--refer them to a colleague. A sense of connection can install blind spots in even the wisest person.

If you're at home or at your favorite cafe with the laptop, you're not on your guard as you are if you're conducting a face to face interview.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/30/2009 10:52PM by corboy.

While I do agree that "befriending" is both possible and potentially dangerous, I have to admit that I've never quite understood why we naturally form some sort of identification between the speaker and what is spoken. I have (at least) several dozen regular or semi-regular contributors on SHAMblog, and though of course I may adopt a friendlier, more casual posture in dealing with them on the blog--I may speak in a more familiar way--I don't think I ever have a problem separating the speaker from the speech. Which is to say, I judge the ideas on their own merit (assuming I judge them at all). And I can tell you that my regulars have no trouble at all judging the things that I write, no matter how "cozy" they may feel about me and SHAMblog!

Another thing I don't understand--and this may rankle some of the folks here--but if Adolph Hitler or Charles Manson were to show up on SHAMblog and offer, say, a new approach to putting together a baseball lineup or a promising new way of running the "cover-2" defensive backfield in an NFL game--or even a plan for handling municipal water emergencies or dealing with the mortgage crisis--how is it even relevant that the speaker is Hitler or Manson? Who cares? Why do we get so hung up on the personalities? Even if the idea put forward is totally out of character with the way the person lives his life, or, hell, even if the person is actively stabbing someone as he writes his comment...again, who cares? Judge the idea for its own sake. Yes? No?

iwrotesham:

You may run your blog however you wish, but the rules that govern this message board are posted and members must follow them.

That is, if you violate the rules you agreed to before posting here you will be banned from this message board.

There have been repeated problems with Internet trolls and apologists, who have come here with the apparent purpose of subverting threads.

BTW--the focus of this thread is Byron Katie, not the way in which you run your blog.

If you wish to discuss another subject start another thread on that topic.

iwrotesham has been banned from this message board.

Frankly he seemed to be here for self-promotional and self-serving reasons, not to discuss the topic.

Count how many times he used the word "I" in his last post.

Very telling.

hmm, it looks like there may be a misunderstanding here, which is easy to happen with so many posts flying by.

This thread actually has mentioned SHAMblog many times, due to its mentioning Byron Katie, something like the Guruphiliac blog situation.

And there were some very recent comments about SHAMblog in this thread, about how its such a "co-incidence" that Byron Katie promoters like Stever Robbins and Carol Skolnick have seemingly tried to use SHAMblog to their advantage or associate with it.
Also, a former Byron Katie promoter Steven Sashen, has made many posts at SHAMblog as well.

It appears that questioning SHAMblog in regards to Byron Katie caused Steve Salerno the operator of that blog to respond in the thread, which is fair.
The book SHAM is a good book, as it is one of the few books out there, that criticizes much of the Self-Help flim-flam in the world today. We need many more of these books.

It seems that there has been a misunderstanding here, as is easy to happen with plain-text typing.

So I would vote that he be unblocked.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/01/2009 02:00AM by The Anticult.

Quote
The Anticult
It seems that there has been a misunderstanding here, as is easy to happen with plain-text typing.

So I would vote that he be unblocked.

I second that. RR, please reconsider Mr. Salerno's membership here!