Guest guest Posted August 4, 2001 Report Share Posted August 4, 2001 It's interesting that he never felt the need to lurk here for a very long time before, whereas he was on MM ages ago. Maybe it's sorta like Coming of Age, showing we're actually becoming a force to be reckoned with, and that must be something worthwhile. Ok. Can someone tell me please, what is the genesis of this antipathy toward Jim Shirk? I usually don't read the posts about him, but this keeps arising in thread after freaking thread ,so, let's set it all out. What did he do, in your view, that is so odious? --Mona--(who didn't even know who Jim Shirk was until all this crap on this list, save for one time when he was welcomed to an LSR online chat meeting, where an anti-AA host clearly was delighted to see him) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 4, 2001 Report Share Posted August 4, 2001 > - If he can rationalize a way to do that and to keep his self-respect, > that's up > -to him. > > Pete He's a treatment field stepper. He also happens to firmly believe that > he can have a God and remain an atheist. Do you doubt for one second that > he can do the above? > > You're not dealing with a rational person there no matter how much >you may > want to. Well the latest is that he appears to say he's had offlist supportive emails saying he should stay. Funny how folks always claim that who dont get any on the list itself, often also with the rider 'because they're too afraid to speak up on this hostile list itself'. Funny how the Diener supporters never had a problem speaking up for him. Well my latest offer is something I was toying with anyway for banishments: having a poll on whether ppl want him here or not. Certainly would solve the question of a democratic mandate pretty well. The funny thing is I bet then our critics would say we were like a cult forcing ppl to comform to a group norm... It's interesting that he never felt the need to lurk here for a very long time before, whereas he was on MM ages ago. Maybe it's sorta like Coming of Age, showing we're actually becoming a force to be reckoned with, and that must be something worthwhile. P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 What Shirk does that's very tacky (to say the least) is to lurk on non-12-step or anti-12-step lists, see what certain people are posting, and then "out" certain things about them on other lists where he is a more active member. That is very tacky, if it is personal stuff. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 > > Ok. Can someone tell me please, what is the genesis of this antipathy toward > Jim Shirk? I usually don't read the posts about him, but this keeps arising > in thread after freaking thread ,so, let's set it all out. What did he do, > in your view, that is so odious? > > --Mona--(who didn't even know who Jim Shirk was until all this crap on this > list, save for one time when he was welcomed to an LSR online chat meeting, > where an anti-AA host clearly was delighted to see him) ------------------- Mona -- What Shirk does that's very tacky (to say the least) is to lurk on non-12-step or anti-12-step lists, see what certain people are posting, and then " out " certain things about them on other lists where he is a more active member. His own stated reason for lurking on the MM list years ago was to try to find some posts by people who found moderation difficult or impossible, so he could write about it on AA lists -- a kind of " See, we always knew moderation was BS " kind of thing. Sometimes he gets his info and even his lists confused as he plays this game though -- not long ago he claimed I had said certain things about myself on Addict-L -- not only were the " revelations " inaccurate, but I've never been a member of Addict-L. The exchanges he was (mis)quoting were from a previous e-list of Ken's -- " addictions-discussion " . Anyway, those of us " in the know " read easily between the lines when he says he is here to " learn " . ~Rita p.s. I have OTOH found some things he has done to be praiseworthy -- e.g. go to the authorities re Froistad -- and have let him know that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 Rita: Does he post on this list? I've never seen anything he's posted. Just for fun I went to an aa chat room. I was slapped with a gozillion slogans and insults. Before one hurls an insult, one ought consider whether or not the recipient gives a damn. Since leaving aa, I seem to have developed more self-esteem and confidence than I ever dreamed possible in aa. Maybe I ought to stay off aa chat rooms and leave them alone. They do have a right to believe in any BS they choose to. It was interesting though that their defense to rational statements and questions was either a quote from the bb, a slogan, or an insult. They seem unable to argue for aa on any rational grounds, which just proves to me that aa is a very strange way to treat addiction problems. Jan In a message dated 8/5/01 9:37:56 AM Central Daylight Time, rita66@... writes: << > > Ok. Can someone tell me please, what is the genesis of this antipathy toward > Jim Shirk? I usually don't read the posts about him, but this keeps arising > in thread after freaking thread ,so, let's set it all out. What did he do, > in your view, that is so odious? > > --Mona--(who didn't even know who Jim Shirk was until all this crap on this > list, save for one time when he was welcomed to an LSR online chat meeting, > where an anti-AA host clearly was delighted to see him) ------------------- Mona -- What Shirk does that's very tacky (to say the least) is to lurk on non-12-step or anti-12-step lists, see what certain people are posting, and then " out " certain things about them on other lists where he is a more active member. His own stated reason for lurking on the MM list years ago was to try to find some posts by people who found moderation difficult or impossible, so he could write about it on AA lists -- a kind of " See, we always knew moderation was BS " kind of thing. Sometimes he gets his info and even his lists confused as he plays this game though -- not long ago he claimed I had said certain things about myself on Addict-L -- not only were the " revelations " inaccurate, but I've never been a member of Addict-L. The exchanges he was (mis)quoting were from a previous e-list of Ken's -- " addictions-discussion " . Anyway, those of us " in the know " read easily between the lines when he says he is here to " learn " . >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 Shirk is also one of the worst liars ever to set foot into history. His nose must be about four miles long. My first run-in with the wimp came when someone here notified that the soul-raper was saying things about me over at ADDICY L, so I joined and went over there for a face-off with the slimey scum bag. The thread was " How Embarassing " which was started by a west coast doctor (I believe Doogan was her name) The thread started on the second week of March of this year and lasted for about a month. If you are interested just go to the ADDICT L archives and you will see March week 2. Tommy > > > > Ok. Can someone tell me please, what is the genesis of this antipathy toward > > Jim Shirk? I usually don't read the posts about him, but this keeps arising > > in thread after freaking thread ,so, let's set it all out. What did he do, > > in your view, that is so odious? > > > > --Mona--(who didn't even know who Jim Shirk was until all this crap on this > > list, save for one time when he was welcomed to an LSR online chat meeting, > > where an anti-AA host clearly was delighted to see him) > > ------------------- > > Mona -- > > What Shirk does that's very tacky (to say the least) is to lurk on non-12-step or anti-12-step lists, see what certain people are posting, and then " out " certain things about them on other lists where he is a more active member. > > His own stated reason for lurking on the MM list years ago was to try to find some posts by people who found moderation difficult or impossible, so he could write about it on AA lists -- a kind of " See, we always knew moderation was BS " kind of thing. > > Sometimes he gets his info and even his lists confused as he plays this game though -- not long ago he claimed I had said certain things about myself on Addict-L -- not only were the " revelations " inaccurate, but I've never been a member of Addict-L. The exchanges he was (mis)quoting were from a previous e-list of Ken's -- " addictions-discussion " . > > Anyway, those of us " in the know " read easily between the lines when he says he is here to " learn " . > > ~Rita > > p.s. I have OTOH found some things he has done to be praiseworthy - - e.g. go to the authorities re Froistad -- and have let him know that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 Pete: I know aa is irrational etc. I just enjoy yanking people's chains once in a while, and they are such an easy target . I know their language, their mindset, and I know what's wrong with it all. Can't say it enough - I'm soooooo glad to be out of aa. Jan ------------------------- In a message dated 8/5/01 3:18:45 PM Central Daylight Time, dmarcoot@... writes: << thats becuase there is nothing rational, about AA and the steps to begin with, all they have is BB, slogans and insults to offer newcomers ('we agnotiscs " is one giant insult to anyone with a mind) . all they have is a belief system which is based on the irrational and absoluty requires a lack of critical thinking for it to perpetuate itself (thats one of first things they attack in newcomers when they arrive " your best thinking got you here " ). logical and reason, critical thinking all undermine the belef system starngel hold, thus what is reasonable to outsiders is really and assult on thier whole program, and must be attacked. They seem unable to argue for aa on any rational > grounds, which just proves to me that aa is a very strange way to treat > addiction problems. > Jan >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 5, 2001 Report Share Posted August 5, 2001 thats becuase there is nothing rational, about AA and the steps to begin with, all they have is BB, slogans and insults to offer newcomers ('we agnotiscs " is one giant insult to anyone with a mind) . all they have is a belief system which is based on the irrational and absoluty requires a lack of critical thinking for it to perpetuate itself (thats one of first things they attack in newcomers when they arrive " your best thinking got you here " ). logical and reason, critical thinking all undermine the belef system starngel hold, thus what is reasonable to outsiders is really and assult on thier whole program, and must be attacked. They seem unable to argue for aa on any rational > grounds, which just proves to me that aa is a very strange way to treat > addiction problems. > Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.