siofra -

Thanks for your message. I had forgotten that you can't post privately until you have sent 9 posts to the discussion. I was in this situation once before.

To me, this is a flaw in the setup of this discussion. The private message function is supposed to allow folks to talk without having to give out an email address, but--because of the 9-postings-first rule--you wind up having to exchange email addresses anyway (which is OK with me).

(DISCUSSION MODERATOR: Will you please pass along this feedback about the site?]

siofra, I'll contact you at the address you gave.

Thanks.

ciruela

The 10 message rule was put in place to protect the people who post here in good faith.

You can imagine, I'm sure, the number of phoney posts and attempts at harrassment and intimidation, let alone the number of attempts by cultists to subvert the boards.



EZ

ezdoesit:

That's correct.

The 10 message minimum was put in place because members or supporters of various groups discussed here critically began to spam the maiboxes. In fact, some only joined the board to abuse the private messaging system.

I’ve not been on the discussion for a few days now—getting finished with the last gasp of the software release for my company. As of yesterday, it was finally over—YIPPEE!!!

However, there is a second reason I have not participated in the list for a few days that I would like to share at this time. In response to the last comments from siofra and ponderosa (both of whom identify themselves as HAI interns), I had decided to try forsaking the list to have an open discussion of my issues with siofra, at her encouragement.

This decision, unfortunately, turned out to be a mistake. I am very disappointed in my private exchange with siofra, and I wish I had not bothered.

MY PRIVATE EXCHANGE WITH SIOFRA

In my initial emails to siofra, she seems to be trying to understand my issues with HAI. Then, suddenly, on her second response to me, she claimed I was being untruthful and that she couldn’t’ take my remarks at face value anymore. She also accused me of distortion in my comments on this discussion board. I apologize for taking up space here, but being accused of lying and distortion hurts a lot, and I want to clear the air here.

I would like to address siofra’s accusations in her private message to me, because I believe her misunderstandings stem from coming into the discussion late and not thoroughly reading the previous posts (even though she claimed to do so). I do not wish anyone else on the list to feel that I have misled them, so I want to point out these issues and refer you to my previous posts.

MY RESPONSE TO SIOFRA'S ACCUSATIONS

siofra felt I had not told the truth, because she found out that my boyfriend was ploy before HAI and indeed is married.. In my post on 6-16-2006, I stated that my boyfriend was poly before I met him and that is the case—he is in an open marriage. I knew his wife and she knew me and knew of my relationship with her husband. In my post of 7-8-2006, I stated that my boyfriend had two other partners whom I got along with. A lot of poly people are in legal marriages. This is nothing unusual in the poly community.

siofra also felt I had been untruthful because I criticized the irresponsible polyamory that HAI seems to foster, even though I myself had had poly relationships and had met my former partner at a polyamory conference. Again, if you look at my posting of 7-8-2006 I drew a distinction between the polyamory of HAI and other, more responsible polyamory situations I had seen. I think HAI’s model of polyamory is far for akin to swinging (AND, in the interest of full disclosure, lest siofra accuse me of lying again, let me mention that I have tried swinging before, too).

siofra also said that I had made a “distorted” connection between HAI and Jim Jones on the discussion board. I DID NOT. If you look at my post of 8-10-2006, you will see that I gave a link to an article that appeared in the SF Weekly (a San Francisco-based newspaper owned by the Village Voice). I merely noted that the writer of that article had placed HAI and Jim Jones on the same timeline in its history of the Feel Good Culture of San Francisco.

REITERATING MY ISSUES WITH HAI

My issues all along in this discussion have been as follows:

1. HAI claims that it isn’t about sex, it’s about relationships, when actually it seems to be very much about sex. It wasn’t me who called HAI “It's a swinger's club, or a dating agency for those into 'alternative lifestyles.' That was kath (somebody I don’t even know personally) in her post of 4-4-2006. Also, karenb, in her posting of “Landmark for the genitals.” (again, someone I don’t know) in her posting of 5-30-2006. So, I’m not the only person who thinks these things about HAI..

2. HAI is exerting an addictive influence over some of its followers, and that isn’t healthy. You will never convince me that what I saw going on with my former boyfriend wasn’t addiction. I am not going to rehash it again, unless someone wishes me to do so. I will be glad to give specifics of his behavior that I have not previously posted.

3. HAI team members are essentially practicing psychotherapy without a license and that’s dangerous, both because they don’t know what they’re doing and because they refuse to follow standard practices regarding “dual relationships,” that is, getting involved with an attendees sexually. Over the years, trained psychologists and counselors have developed good rules for keeping everyone safe and the prohibition on dual relationships is one of them. Take the case of my small group leader who approached my boyfriend for sex. Had this woman been aware of—and subject to—the standards of licensed therapists, she would have known that her behavior was inappropriate, and wouldn’t have been telling me that she “couldn’t grok” what I was upset about.

I am very disappointed in my exchange with siofra. I really did try to deal with her sincerely and honestly, and she really slapped me in the face. I have told siofra that I do not wish to have further contact with her. I gave HAI once chance and one chance only through her, as their voluntary representative. Don’t trust these people!

Ciruela:

Your post illustrates why private messaging can be problematic.

Those who support various groups and/or hope to undercut discussion here may use the PM system and/or email discourse to advance their own agenda.

It's probably best to discuss everything out in the open here on the board.

That way we can all see everthing first-hand.

Moderator,

I now agree with you. Once burned, twice shy.

BTW, the other thing I forgot to mention is that siofra apparently went straight to the very people I was criticizing and told them what I had said in my private post. I know this, because she had details about me and my boyfriend that I have never posted on the list.

siofra is apparently little more than an Internet "troll."

We get a few trolls at this message board.

Dear List-

I do not know what a troll is so I cannot say if I am one or not. If it has to do with why I wrote to this list, I will share that a HAI assistant wrote to a couple of us and asked for our thoughts on the blog. I made a personal decision to enter into the conversation. I have never written to a blog before so I don't know the jargon (e.g. troll) or the norms.

What I can do is share with you 1) my letter to Cirruella and 2) the difference between her accusations about me and reality. The letter is below with only the names generalized to protect Cirruella and the individuals named privacy. Note: Cirruella has written me several emails with strong comments about her ex-partner. I felt uncomfortable reading them and I made a choice in my post to be honest about how I felt and why. This to me was in much higher integrity than being manipulative and playacting in some way to get her to do something (e.g. stay in conversation with me).

As you will see in the post, I was very open to supporting her bringing her comments to a HAI forum where they could be dealt with constructively. I also had personal boundaries about how much I was willing to hear another person be defamed repeatedly when I didn't know what the truth was, had no power to do anything about it and did not trust the source. I was open to discussing this distrust but Cirruella truncated communication and I respected the boundary she set of never writing to her again.

The final paragraph was my response to her assertion that HAI should monitor and direct the balance in their volunteers' personal lifes to make sure they weren't going overboard in their attendance at HAI events. She indicated HAI not doing this made it cultish, I believed this kind of management of peoples' lives was inappropriate and said so.

I did not speak with the individuals Cirruella accused me of speaking with in her off-line communication. The information I received came from reading her ex-partner's intern application and from clearing with him that I was speaking ill about him on-line (treating him as I would want to be treated). I did not divulge anything to him Cirruella had shared with me privately.

The moderator's comments show me that moderation is not practiced in this forum. All it takes is one person hurling an accusation and another is pigeon-holed and found guilty. Not what I would expect of a forum dedicated to finding out truth.

Siofra

_______________

Cirruella-

This is going to be a quick note because I'm pooped and I have a 7 am job interview to prep for. I can talk by phone later this week if you like.

My reactions to the situation are pretty mixed at this point. This weekend I learned both that [your ex-partner] has been married for 39 years and that you two met at a polyamory conference. It is a very different picture than you painted on-line and I am sitting with how I feel about that. It isn't a good feeling but I'm not sure what to do with it.

As for what you've shared so far, I believe my best role here is to help you clarify what you feel strongly enough to bring forward about [person 1], [person 2], [event 1] and HAI Northeast and be a conduit for those conversations with people who can make a difference. Griping on electronic bulletin boards and emails really doesn't serve anyone - HAI doesn't get feedback it needs and you don't get to have an impact in a way that changes anything.

I really want to stay away from discussing what [person 1] did or didn't do - if it should be reported, report it but if not, I'd rather stay out of the muck between you. Frankly after the Jim Jones article distortion and the writing as if HAI made [person 1] poly when you met him at a poly event, I don't know when what you say about [person 1] is true or not and I don't see any benefit to either one of us in going down this hole. I still sympathize with your pain but I no longer feel I can take what you say at face value.

My perspective differs from yours on what would make an organization cultish - to me any organization that forced its values on its volunteers to the level you are suggesting (e.g. managing their life balances) is far more controlling than any group has a right to be and far more cultish than one which stays out of these personal details. You are asking HAI to act as a parent to the volunteers which is not appropriate. Managing volunteers' behavior to participants is completely appropriate - managing the details of their personal/romantic lives feels way over the top to me.

If you want to discuss taking the issues you have flagged forward, please let me know some good times for us to speak.

Best wishes,
Nan

Well, folks -

I'm glad that siofra provided the text of her post--I would have done so myself, except I was being respectful of the fact that it had been a private communication.

As you can see for yourselves, she does claim that I misled folks on the discussion board (in paragraphs 2 and 4 of her message), and I have responded to those claims in my previous post, citing what I said on this board and on what date.

Secondly, she admits that she did go straight to one of the people I had issues with--my ex-boyfriend!


Siofra wrote:

"You are asking HAI to act as a parent to the volunteers which is not appropriate. Managing volunteers' behavior to participants is completely appropriate - managing the details of their personal/romantic lives feels way over the top to me."


I take issue with these comments:

* Is the policeman who pulls over a guy doing 100 mph being a "parent" -- No, that officer is trying to keep everyone safe.

* ANY volunteer organization DOES manage the behavior of its volunteers to some extent. What kind of behavior the organization manages depends on the mission of that organization.


For example:

Habitat for Humanity's Volunteer Code of Conduct requires volunteers not "be negligent, careless, or abusive of HfHO's equipment or property. It also requires volunteers to be patient with other volunteers who lack construction experience. These are appropriate requirements for an organization that builds houses for the disadvantaged.

The Special Olympics is even stricter and requires that volunteers "not engage in any inappropriate contact or relationship with athletes, volunteers or other participants of Special Olympics."

Thus, I think that an organization, such as HAI, which provides with sexuality, emotions, and relationships should indeed monitor the behavior of its volunteers in regard to sexual relationships.

Hi All,

I've taken 6 HAI workshops, and have found them very valuable. I want to give my experience with respect to a couple of Ciruela's issues.

Quote
Ciruela
1. HAI claims that it isn’t about sex, it’s about relationships, when actually it seems to be very much about sex.

The workshops are entitled, "Love, Intimacy and Sexuality." That seems accurate to me. I've never heard anyone say that HAI workshops are not about sex. Of course a sexuality workshop is about sex! But I'd say they are not *only* about sex.

Quote
Ciruela
3. HAI team members are essentially practicing psychotherapy without a license and that’s dangerous, both because they don’t know what they’re doing and because they refuse to follow standard practices regarding “dual relationships,” that is, getting involved with an attendees sexually.

I've never experienced a team member other than a facilitator, who leads the workshop, do anything like practicing psychotherapy. It's great to have their support, and I appreciate what they do for the attendees. And my experience has always been that they are quire clear about not getting involved with attendees sexually for the required period.