Laura Marble Strikes Back
Posted by:
Madshus
()
Date: December 14, 2006 01:25AM
One can talk about the generalities of the 'netherworld of cyberspace' all they want, but the specifics of the matter is Landmark Education and the effects of LGATs.
Flamers, lukers and what-not do not diminish the facts regarding the dangers of large group awareness training, and her writing about such (the flamers, etc) does not diminish the need for others to discuss the details LGATs, whether it's face-to-face, or here on this board which is another legitimate avenue to do so.
It's interesting that she spent more time writing about 'surviving cyberspace' and this discussion board than she did surviving a Landmark Education forum, the latter of which I believe is far more dangerous. But she is a 'sharp' individual, and able to decipher what's really a potential danger, so no worries. :wink:
Best of luck Laura... oh wait, she doesn't read this board anymore... I forgot.
Laura Marble Strikes Back
Posted by:
Jack Oskar Larm
()
Date: December 14, 2006 04:02AM
Laura Marble wrote:
What an angry, small minded 'flame' we have in Laura. Bet this article was easier to write. So much to prove; so much to hate.
Yes, you can never know who is 'real' on the Internet. Sometimes it happens face to face, skin to skin - year upon year. What's the use in bagging the Internet when you haven't worked out its benefits. Perhaps being anonymous is not so bad. It's a personal choice for some. Who does it really hurt? Yeah, I know the horror stories...but really. Hey, smell the coffee - real people do exist (not just 'shady lurkers').
The Internet is a 'wild realm', but so what? Be thankful. And, please, try and remain balanced in your prose. Take deep breaths; consider your thoughts. Just compare the 'tone' of your Landmark article to this one...polar opposites, I think, and your next article will be better.
Quote
To my surprise, I learned of all kinds of shady lurkers that probably every teenager knows about but were new to me.
First, there are "flame throwers." They personally attack you in ways that would backfire on them outside the anonymous world of Cyberspace.
Then there are "trolls." They find sport in watching people go ballistics. So they pick carefully chosen fights just to see what will happen.
"Flame wars" occur when trolls cross-post messages to forums vehemently opposed to each other's causes. Sometimes people put on "flame shields" as protection from flames.
And get this - not only are people anonymous on the Web, they're more anonymous than I thought. Often they have more than one account name so when they want to be outrageous they don't have to sully their regular personas' reputations to do it.
It's a wild realm, Cyberspace. Which is why next time I'm looking for productive conversation, I'll talk to people with real names.
What an angry, small minded 'flame' we have in Laura. Bet this article was easier to write. So much to prove; so much to hate.
Yes, you can never know who is 'real' on the Internet. Sometimes it happens face to face, skin to skin - year upon year. What's the use in bagging the Internet when you haven't worked out its benefits. Perhaps being anonymous is not so bad. It's a personal choice for some. Who does it really hurt? Yeah, I know the horror stories...but really. Hey, smell the coffee - real people do exist (not just 'shady lurkers').
The Internet is a 'wild realm', but so what? Be thankful. And, please, try and remain balanced in your prose. Take deep breaths; consider your thoughts. Just compare the 'tone' of your Landmark article to this one...polar opposites, I think, and your next article will be better.
Laura Marble Strikes Back
Posted by:
Maggie
()
Date: December 14, 2006 08:47AM
Laura Marble is demonizing those who disagree with her. It is a common tactic in SCIENTOLOGY, as well --
From Glen McClelland article on deprogramming:
From Glen McClelland article on deprogramming:
Quote
When confronted with any sort of negative criticism of Scientology a Scientologist will typically fail to confront the substance of the criticism but instead moves to discover the source of the criticism. Criticism is seen as proof of a sick or evil mind at work spreading such evil information...the criticism is usually not evaluated as to whether it is true or false and what its implications are. Instead the typical Scientologist will somehow attempt to discredit the source of the information.
Laura Marble Strikes Back
Posted by:
glam
()
Date: December 14, 2006 12:09PM
Ah, well, at least she mentioned the "c" word in this column. It might give her readers something to think about. They probably had no idea Landmark would show up on a cult website.
Hope she turned off that Google alert. :wink:
Glam
Hope she turned off that Google alert. :wink:
Glam
Laura Marble Strikes Back
Posted by:
Maggie
()
Date: December 14, 2006 12:49PM
Why do you think I keep typing LAURA MARBLE ;)
Laura Marble Strikes Back
Posted by:
ON2 LF
()
Date: December 14, 2006 01:55PM
If LAURA MARBLE is so sure that she hasn't been infected by landmark's programming, then I would challenge her to contact the Wellspring retreat counselling center (in Colorado?) and sign up for exit counselling. It would be a win-win situation if she did. She gets the counselling and finds that she never 'drank the cool-aid' and all is well, or, she gets the counselling and realizes she's been had and begins the exit from what is a nasty place to leave your mind.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.